Do entitlements help the poor get out of poverty?

[Renae]

So then there are plenty of jobs in the US economy left unfilled because people are collecting unemployement and not looking for work?

Let me ask you:

You can sit at home, making say 50-75% of your previous pay, or take a job making say 65-85%. Now, some folks, will take that 65-85% and hope for better, but humans, being the type to take the path of least resistance, will stay home and take the 50-75% "hoping" to find a better job.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Let me ask you:
You can sit at home, making say 50-75% of your previous pay, or take a job making say 65-85%. Now, some folks, will take that 65-85% and hope for better, but humans, being the type to take the path of least resistance, will stay home and take the 50-75% "hoping" to find a better job.

Let me ask you:
Does the ratio of job seekers to jobs available have any impact on job seekers ability to find a job?

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Also from the Census Bureau

INCOME	                PERCENT WHO VOTED 2008
.Less than $10,000	49
.$10,000 to $14,999	51.2
.$15,000 to $19,999	55.9
.$20,000 to $29,999	56.3
.$30,000 to $39,999	62.2
.$40,000 to $49,999	64.7
.$50,000 to $74,999	70.9
.$75,000 to $99,999	76.4
.$100,000 to $149,999	78.4
.$150,000 and over	81.6

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/socdemo/voting/publications/p20/2008/Table 09-1.xls

It seems that rational political parties would target the middle and above.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Did you know most people on unemployment, find a job within 2 weeks of unemployment running out?

Could you please cite for this too?

'cuz the BLS disagrees:
http://www.bls.gov/opub/ils/pdf/opbils89.pdf

It seems that most people get there jobs sooner than that. Usually pretty early on.
I cant get the table coded correctly. But until recently,most people got a new job in less than 5 weeks. Recently, it's taken up to 14 wks for "most people" to get another job

one more try

	<5	<14	<26	<52	>53
1994	47.3	29	11.4	8.3	4
1995	50.5	28.6	10.7	6.6	3.5
1996	52.1	28.8	10.1	6.5	2.6
1997	52.3	28.9	10.3	6	2.5
1998	54.5	28.5	8.9	5.8	2.4
1999	55.6	28.3	9.2	5	2
2000	56.5	28.2	8.1	4.9	2.1
2001	55.7	29	9.2	4.6	1.6
2002	47.4	29.8	12.1	8.1	2.6
2003	44.7	29.1	12.8	9.3	4.1
2004	45.5	28.6	12.3	9.3	4.3
2005	47.3	28.7	12	8	3.9
2006	49.5	28.5	11.7	7.5	2.8
2007	49	29.7	11.4	7.1	2.8
2008	47.2	30.4	11.9	7.3	3.2
2009	38.9	29.1	14.9	12.1	5.1
2010	34	25.9	13.8	15.3	11

there we go

 

[Paschendale]

Let me ask you:

You can sit at home, making say 50-75% of your previous pay, or take a job making say 65-85%. Now, some folks, will take that 65-85% and hope for better, but humans, being the type to take the path of least resistance, will stay home and take the 50-75% "hoping" to find a better job.

Why do people who make these absurd suppositions about other people never take boredom into account? The "looking for a job" status is really unpleasant. People need something to do in order to be fulfilled and happy. Recreation is only pleasant when it is a diversion, not when it is a full time experience. As a species, we crave a purpose. We define ourselves by our professions. It's a well documented phenomenon that retirees often succumb to health problems quickly after leaving their jobs, from lack of energy and purpose. Sitting at home is not the path of least resistance. Sticking with a crappy job you hate because you're not sure you can find a better one is.

These kinds of arguments are nothing more than an attempt to portray the poor as lazy, and in my experience, the argument is usually racially motivated, too.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

...the argument is usually racially motivated, too.

Unless you're going to own up to calling Mr V a racist, you should prob'ly point out that you didn't intend to imply that he was one.
imho

 

[Paschendale]

Did you know most people on unemployment, find a job within 2 weeks of unemployment running out?

People do what's in their best interest.

Also the vast, vast majority of welfare recipients are children. I suppose it's a shame that no one reads print media anymore... Then those lazy kids could all get paper routes and get off welfare!

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Let me ask you:

You can sit at home, making say 50-75% of your previous pay, or take a job making say 65-85%. Now, some folks, will take that 65-85% and hope for better, but humans, being the type to take the path of least resistance, will stay home and take the 50-75% "hoping" to find a better job.

So right now millions of jobs are left open waiting for people to apply for them. That is what you are stating correct

That the economy and the high unemployement right now is because so many people are unwilling to look for work because they are getting UI

 

[Paschendale]

Unless you're going to own up to calling Mr V a racist, you should prob'ly point out that you didn't intend to imply that he was one.
imho

I don't know what's going on in his mind, just that a lot of people who make these kinds of arguments do. He may not be, but the people he's getting the numbers from may well be. All the raging against "welfare queens" and the like, always targeted at black mothers, despite the inaccuracy of the portrayal. And whenever there is a depiction of a family taking advantage of the system, it's always a black family.

I don't know if he's a racist, but it wouldn't be surprising. Also not surprising about a lot of other conservative posters here. Certainly one of the driving points behind the anti-welfare and entitlement movement is racist. It doesn't matter if every individual who takes that point is. Besides, very few racists will actually admit to themselves what they believe. Trying to argue about who is or isn't is a waste of time. But the POLICY... that is racist, and demonstrably so.

 

[Renae]

Let me ask you:
Does the ratio of job seekers to jobs available have any impact on job seekers ability to find a job?

Not that I have seen

 

[jdunn0095]

What creates poverty is the government trying to take care of the ones who wont take care of themselves. The american people relying on the governmental systems is what puts our country into debt. Poor teachers have lost their jobs because the government has to do budget cuts to keep supporting these americans when really all its doing is creating more nproblems. They need to leave the rich out of this. They are doing their part in our country they are the ones growing and expanding becuase they are trying to create jobs for people who are suffering from other job losses or for students who will be graduating and will be needing a job. Too many people have so much against the rich. It really shows what kind of people live in our country to not support those who want to grow in this world while growing having the possibility to create more jobs through growth!
Why in the world would any one believe that it is fair to increase the tax percentages on some and not others. No matter what the rich will always pay more in taxes if we stay in the same bracket its inevitable.

 

[U.S. Socialist.]

What creates poverty is the government trying to take care of the ones who wont take care of themselves. The american people relying on the governmental systems is what puts our country into debt. Poor teachers have lost their jobs because the government has to do budget cuts to keep supporting these americans when really all its doing is creating more nproblems. They need to leave the rich out of this. They are doing their part in our country they are the ones growing and expanding becuase they are trying to create jobs for people who are suffering from other job losses or for students who will be graduating and will be needing a job. Too many people have so much against the rich. It really shows what kind of people live in our country to not support those who want to grow in this world while growing having the possibility to create more jobs through growth!
Why in the world would any one believe that it is fair to increase the tax percentages on some and not others. No matter what the rich will always pay more in taxes if we stay in the same bracket its inevitable.

If your argument is correct then please explain how the social-democracies of Europe which have much stronger social-safety nets/well-fare programs, higher taxes on the rich than we do, have much lower unemployment and poverty?

 

[Renae]

If all Paschendale has is to imply I'm a racist or reading racist sources he's all ready lost the debate on the merit of ideas and is now in the realm of emotionalism.

 

[TurtleDude]

Which demographic groups are most likely to vote?
It would seem sensible to focus on those who're most likely to actually show up and vote.

one of the reasons why Obama won was the huge number of first time black voters

it caused one of my friends to lose in Ohio as these new voters voted dem across the board

he won his seat back when the hordes of new obama voters didn't show up in 2010-he crushed the guy who took his job

 

[TurtleDude]

Why do people who make these absurd suppositions about other people never take boredom into account? The "looking for a job" status is really unpleasant. People need something to do in order to be fulfilled and happy. Recreation is only pleasant when it is a diversion, not when it is a full time experience. As a species, we crave a purpose. We define ourselves by our professions. It's a well documented phenomenon that retirees often succumb to health problems quickly after leaving their jobs, from lack of energy and purpose. Sitting at home is not the path of least resistance. Sticking with a crappy job you hate because you're not sure you can find a better one is.

These kinds of arguments are nothing more than an attempt to portray the poor as lazy, and in my experience, the argument is usually racially motivated, too.

in my experience the far left tends to insinuate or downright openly claim anyone who doesn't buy into their welfare socialist drivel are "racist"

its dishonest and its downright disgusting IMHO

 

[TurtleDude]

If your argument is correct then please explain how the social-democracies of Europe which have much stronger social-safety nets/well-fare programs, higher taxes on the rich than we do, have much lower unemployment and poverty?

A study I posted the other night demonstrated that even in those socialist nations the richest taxpayers share of the income tax is not much different than their share of the income-the USA has the largest gap between the share of the income the top one percent receives versus their share of the income tax burden (22% vs 39%) in other words, the poor and the middle class pay a far higher share of the income tax burden in europe than they do here

 

[U.S. Socialist.]

A study I posted the other night demonstrated that even in those socialist nations the richest taxpayers share of the income tax is not much different than their share of the income-the USA has the largest gap between the share of the income the top one percent receives versus their share of the income tax burden (22% vs 39%) in other words, the poor and the middle class pay a far higher share of the income tax burden in europe than they do here

Still assuming that study is correct, that doesn't address the issue of the social-safety net which he clams creates poverty. If that is true then those countries should have much higher poverty rates and unemployment than the U.S. when in fact they have much lower poverty and unemployment.

 

[TurtleDude]

Still assuming that study is correct, that doesn't address the issue of the social-safety net which he clams creates poverty. If that is true then those countries should have much higher poverty rates and unemployment than the U.S. when in fact they have much lower poverty and unemployment.

I believe the welfare programs in the USA were first proposed with good intentions but quickly were seen as a means to create masses of dependent voters

 

[U.S. Socialist.]

I believe the welfare programs in the USA were first proposed with good intentions but quickly were seen as a means to create masses of dependent voters

The social-democracies seem to be doing fine on that front, though. My main issue is the claim that these programs create poverty when the evidence does not add up.

 

[teamosil]

Just saw on tv that the poverty level in 1965 was 14.3%. Today's poverty level is 14%. So, after trillions of dollars spent on entitlements, they don't help the poor get out of poverty. All they do is maintain the poor under the Democrat's wings during elections. Democrats don't care about u, they just use it as a gimmick for your vote.

They are always adjusting the poverty line, so looking at what percentage of people are below the poverty line and comparing across 45 years isn't really very informative. Somebody who is in poverty today might well have rated as middle class in the 60s.

As for the question of whether safety net spending decreases poverty, it absolutely does. If you line up the countries in the first world by percentage of GDP spent on the safety net, it is almost exactly the same list as if you line them up by intergenerational income mobility. Like only one or two countries are out of order. It is an extremely strong correlation. And, just from personal experience working with families that were on welfare, the reality is that there is nothing they need more than a chance and nobody is giving them that chance except the government. Job training and programs designed to hire people from the ghetto are more important than welfare, but welfare helps a lot.

 

[305rob305]

If your argument is correct then please explain how the social-democracies of Europe which have much stronger social-safety nets/well-fare programs, higher taxes on the rich than we do, have much lower unemployment and poverty?

Yeah right... Most of those social-democracies are going broke. Look at Greece as an example. People are in the street because they WANT their "deserved" entitlements and the gov doesn't have the money to provide them. This is what's happening on America.....wake up. Democrats have created a "we deserve" mentality and just so they can gain more votes. Democrats need the poor to stay poor for their votes....

 

[AdamT]

A study I posted the other night demonstrated that even in those socialist nations the richest taxpayers share of the income tax is not much different than their share of the income-the USA has the largest gap between the share of the income the top one percent receives versus their share of the income tax burden (22% vs 39%) in other words, the poor and the middle class pay a far higher share of the income tax burden in europe than they do here

Well, that's kind of apples and oranges because -- outside of the third world -- most countries don't have the income disparity that we do.

 

[U.S. Socialist.]

Yeah right... Most of those social-democracies are going broke. Look at Greece as an example. People are in the street because they WANT their "deserved" entitlements and the gov doesn't have the money to provide them. This is what's happening on America.....wake up. Democrats have created a "we deserve" mentality and just so they can gain more votes. Democrats need the poor to stay poor for their votes....

Norway isn't going broke, Sweden isn't,Germany isn't, etc. I won't get into Greece because that is a topic that really needs it's own thread. It is far too complex to go into without derailing this thread.

 

[AdamT]

Yeah right... Most of those social-democracies are going broke. Look at Greece as an example. People are in the street because they WANT their "deserved" entitlements and the gov doesn't have the money to provide them. This is what's happening on America.....wake up. Democrats have created a "we deserve" mentality and just so they can gain more votes. Democrats need the poor to stay poor for their votes....

No, it isn't most of them. You might want to check out Germany or France or Sweden or Switzerland or Norway or Denmark, or Canada or etc., etc.

 

[TurtleDude]

its pretty much a given anything the government subsidizes increases. we have subsidized sloth and dependence and it has increased