Also, it's interesting how she doesn't mention the father of these two children.
This is a twofer. It will hurt the poor by reducing the number of minimum wage jobs, and now it will reduce the income of poor people by making them ineligible for welfare benefits.
Liberals must really hate poor people.
I guess this author thinks they should keep their benefits no matter their income??
Even worse, this stupid liberal wants the increase in the min wage AND food stamps, etc., indexed to the new wage so they will continue to get all the government bennies they are getting now.
Earned income and adjusted gross income (AGI) must each be less than:
| If filing... | Qualifying Children Claimed | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zero | One | Two | Three or more | |
| Single, Head of Household or Widowed | $14,820 | $39,131 | $44,454 | $47,747 |
| Married Filing Jointly | $20,330 | $44,651 | $49,974 | $53,267 |
As I have said on here many times, raise the minimum wage and the surrounding economy goes up the same percentage ... nobody wins.
> Also, it’s interesting how she doesn’t mention the father of these two children.
So any women are like black widows these days. They want children. They have sex with a suitable sperm donor, have babies, then kick them out the door so they can collect child support. They get what they want. A man paying pretty hefty child support for 18 years. If he doesn’t pay he gets picked up and put in jail.
> Also, it’s interesting how she doesn’t mention the father of these two children.
So many women are like black widows these days. They want children. They have sex with a suitable sperm donor, have babies, then kick them out the door so they can collect child support. They get what they want. A man paying pretty hefty child support for 18 years. If he doesn’t pay he gets picked up and put in jail.
Something doesn’t seem right with the math. If the benefits are reduced 30 cents for every dollar she makes over $1440 per month, cutoff wouldn’t be at $2116. That’s only $676 more per month. Isn’t that more like 74 cents for every dollar she makes above $1440 (676 x .74 = 500 approx)?
Perhaps I’m being a little dense right now, but I can’t seem to make the author’s figures come out. If the food stamp benefits were truly reduced 30 cents on each dollar made above $1440, that sounds pretty generous to me. She’d have to make $1667 more—about $3,107 per month—to completely lose all $500.
I also agree with some of the other FReepers here. The left’s solution is to raise the minimum wage AND welfare benefits. Every woman in the US deserves a free ride simply by virtue of birthing a baby. Even worse, they’ll call us hypocrites for opposing abortion. If we’re pro-life, the left’s argument goes, we’d have no problem paying welfare for single moms.
The real way it hurts the poor is by making it illegal for them to work.
How dare the government tell people that they are not skilled enough to work. That they are not qualified to agree upon a fair wage with an employer.
LOL! Unintended consequences!
what’s a father? Never met any driving my cab in the bad neighborhoods. Lots of celebrating in the Cab for pregnant 15 or 16 year olds like it was such a great thing that they were giving birth to a kid that would end up in prison in 18 years. but what the heck why do you is paying for welfare section 8 food stamps etc.I forget which part of the Constitution all those things fall under
Soooo, this schmuck want people to earn $15 per hour AND get benefits?
And whose going to pay for those benefits?
All those making, what, $18 an hour?
That’s not going to work. Schmuck.
The problem is our social assistance laws do not reward hard work.
If you work hard, you lose your benefits. If you don’t work, you keep them.
No wonder welfare discourages work because of built-in perverse incentives. Its by design.
If one casts a cynical eye on the entire movement for higher minimum wages, and i don’t believe all the people advocating are thinking this way, relieving the government of these obligations might be the actual goal. The government keeps more and thus can afford to continue to over compensate their own workers. In fact they can add workers. workers which i might add will vote dem in order to keep their own cushy gigs going.
Since libs are by nature math deficient i’m sure some see this as a two fer. Look what i did for you, vote for me and if you want to make sure government stays oversized and you keep your job also vote for me.
Going one step further they likely also believe it won’t result in a tax shortfall. After all either the business pays or the individual does. They’re clearly overlooking business owners taking their jobs elsewhere. In the vein of unexpected consequences i believe this will lead to far more municipalities and states going bankrupt. This will hasten the process if anything.
Fixed it.
Open admission that benefits ruin the incentive to get a job and work.
Folks not smart enough to know when a politician is lying
to their faces, deserve what they vote for.
—Kenneth E. Smith, 1966.