WHAT IF? While living in SF... (Rainbow: find a job, to buy, calculation)

[morenitachula]

Originally Posted by Matadora

Would someone in your scenario become eligible for SDI after the unemployment has run out?

FAQ from the SDI website: FAQ DI Eligibility

I quit my job (or was laid-off) and now I’m disabled. Am I eligible for DI?

It depends on your situation. To qualify for DI benefits, you must be actively connected to the labor market, either working or looking for work at the time your disability begins. The Employment Development Department (EDD) encourages you to file a claim for benefits, even if you are unsure of your labor market status.

I do apologize for the misunderstanding. This was a composite story used to make people think.

I just wanted to get a conversation started about how people end up where they are. This story is about people who refuse to apply for assistance because they don't want any hand outs. So far many have jumped in with "APPLY FOR FREE HEALTHCARE!"

But that's just it. Some people are against government assistance: "Why should WE be paying for THEIR healthcare/food stamps/assistance?" And since they have fallen they don't want to be on the receiving end of something they've spoken against for so long-even if it would help them temporarily.

The stigma attached to receiving assistance...

But Disability is different. I believe that comes from the Social Security funds that you already paid into thru taxes. That would've been another option for them...

[morenitachula]

Originally Posted by Ceece

I will only say that one of the best things people can do in their lives is form long lasting, meaningful relationships from a young age. That means not turning your back on your family because you don't see eye to eye, calling your parents and that annoying Uncle from time to time, keeping up with that friend from HS who always wants to chat, visiting AND inviting your college pals to visit you and helping each other network, putting up with people who aren't exactly like you instead of blowing everyone off to hang with people who "get you" because they've isolated themselves as well.

It's not always possible or easy to do though. Sometimes you will be on your own without a support network and must piecemeal something together.

I should have replied to this one first! She made an excellent point about relationships and how that played into the story. If they would've formed meaningful relationships they would've had someone willing to help them out. But so often people get into cliques or as Ceece put it "hang with people who "get you" because they've isolated themselves as well". But how well could those people "get you" if you fall and they're not even there to help you get back up?

This is a rhetorical question not directed at Ceece but for everyone: How many of your Facebook friends would let you come stay with them for a month or two if you needed it? How many of your college buddies? Coworkers? Family? Friends?

Who would really have your back if it ever got that hard in life?

[morenitachula]

Originally Posted by pch1013

From the general tenor of your remarks, I inferred that you are one of the many people who blames all of SF's problems, and by extension your own, on the current wave of tech-fueled gentrification.

If that's not the case, I apologize.

But if you're one of those who is actively praying for a tech bust and/or an earthquake to drive all the mean rich people away, I don't.

No, sir. This isn't about gentrification. I would have said that or mentioned that. My personal problems don't have any place on a CD board. This is a composite story of two men who shared the same outlook about accepting assistance.

I do not like mean people. Rich or otherwise, and wish that they would go away.

But SF doesn't seem to have a lot of mean people here...

Well maybe the guy who called me a troll for no good reason

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by morenitachula

Okay. I can see your point on most of it, but you missed the part where I told you that he spent all his savings on medical bills. And this is really a composite story. A story of a few people in SF.

I can appreciate your thinking on this.

Thanks!

I also acknowledged there are people who tried their best to build their savings, but still had to file for bankruptcy. I used that example as a reason to support a true universal healthcare system similar in Australia.

[comingbacktocali]

Originally Posted by morenitachula

$15,000?
Is this before of after taxes?

Let's be generous and say after taxes to test this claim out:
That is $1153.85 per month. Let's go on CL and find the cheapest room in SF shall we?... Now Robert says never to break the cardinal sin of spending more than 30% of take home on rent... Which means she'd have to rent a room for $346.15 per month. Does that room exist in SF?... NO.

Okay, my search found a room share for $507 + $30 for utilities in Lower Nob Hill. That would leave her $616.85. Now subtract $80 for a monthly SFMTA pass on her Clipper card for rides within SF or on BART station to station. If she goes to see friends/family/boyfriend/whoever outside of SF She has to load extra money on her Card for the other Transit Systems, and it doesn't cover Caltrain. So lets just subtract another $80 for that leaving $456.85, then her cell phone bill is $80 for unlimited everything Sprint plan because for Verizon only offers 2GB for $75

Leaving $376.85 Which will be gone in one day if you shop at Whole Foods

Bohemians know it can be done because we do it. But I can pay more and have my own place since I'm not living on $15K a year. But it's good to break it down sometimes just to see if it can be done. I like meeting people but I don't know if I could share a room with another girl for a long time. I've done it in hostels, but that's only temporary. Gives me something to think about...

this is the most ridiculous thing i've read in a long time. if you are making 15K/year i highly doubt you are living in nob hill, have an unlimited data plan for your smartphone, worrying about visiting people outside SF via Caltrain, and shopping at whole foods.

was this supposed to be sarcasm?

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Originally Posted by morenitachula

I don't need to move anywhere. Again, like I told the other dude:

This isn't my story. It's a true story, just not mine.

But you must have missed the part of story where the dude spent all of his "SAVINGS" (Emergency Fund) on his medical bills. He didn't want to apply for assistance. That's what losers do right? Take advantage and survive off of the money of others?

However, I do agree with you about living within your means. That's just common sense.

Let us face that facts that all too many people living around here are definitely breaking the 30% rule and lack a sufficient emergency fund. Were they following these guidelines they would not be in this area at all, and experiencing the health issue in question, would have a much better ability to withstand its financial impacts. I will not deny a health issue can burn savings. That is why an emergency fund and the 30% rule are both so important. There are several places outside the Bay Area where a middle income person can hold their housing costs under 20% let alone 30%. The emergency fund goes without saying, that is something a person should start to build shortly after reaching their late teens.

[bmw335xi]

Originally Posted by comingbacktocali

this is the most ridiculous thing i've read in a long time. if you are making 15K/year i highly doubt you are living in nob hill, have an unlimited data plan for your smartphone, worrying about visiting people outside SF via Caltrain, and shopping at whole foods.

was this supposed to be sarcasm?

Exactly, people on welfare shouldn't be living a comfortable lifestyle and especially not a luxorious lifestyle. Welfare is supposed to be a temporary crutch from preventing you from dying, not so you can travel and have fun, while everyone else goes to work.

[Matadora]

Originally Posted by morenitachula

But Disability is different. I believe that comes from the Social Security funds that you already paid into thru taxes. That would've been another option for them...

SDI is NOT a part of Social Security

SDI (California State Disability Insurance) comes from working Californians salaries.

SDI is a deduction from employees’ wages. Employers withhold a percentage for SDI on the first $104,378 in wages paid to each employee in a calendar year.

The 2015 SDI tax rate is 0.9 percent (.009) of SDI taxable wages per employee, per year. SDI is set by the California State Legislature and may change yearly. This includes the rate for PFL. The maximum tax is $939.40 per employee, per year ($104,378 x .009)

If you legally work in CA you pay into a state fund for disability insurance.

DB101 California - California State Disability Insurance (SDI): The Basics

[morenitachula]

Originally Posted by Matadora

SDI is NOT a part of Social Security

SDI (California State Disability Insurance) comes from working Californians salaries.

SDI is a deduction from employees’ wages. Employers withhold a percentage for SDI on the first $104,378 in wages paid to each employee in a calendar year.

The 2015 SDI tax rate is 0.9 percent (.009) of SDI taxable wages per employee, per year. SDI is set by the California State Legislature and may change yearly. This includes the rate for PFL. The maximum tax is $939.40 per employee, per year ($104,378 x .009)

If you legally work in CA you pay into a state fund for disability insurance.

DB101 California - California State Disability Insurance (SDI): The Basics

Okay, thanks for clarifying that

I was only half right because it IS something that a person pays into via taxes it's just not Social Security.

[comingbacktocali]

what is the point of this thread?