Paying Citizens to Become Dependant

The graph below shows the welfare cliff and the massive cut in disposable income a raise would cause a single mother making minimum wage to experience. It NEVER makes financial sense for her to attempt shake off dependency. Never. Government policy seems to be to absolutely destroy the work ethic.

The reality is that a single person making minimum wage and partaking of the bread and circuses provided by the state has a higher standard of living that another earning $69,000 per year and not on the dole.

If you are middle class American working and paying taxes and struggling to get by, you are being punished for your hard work.

You would think by subsidizing a trillion dollar welfare state, working Americans would be absolved of guilt. No way. None of the above will stop us from hearing, day in and day out, that poverty is at crisis levels in the US. The class war is only intensifying. Transfer payments must increase. The $69,000 figure is far too low. The suite of welfare payments should create a standard of living equal to those making six digits.

It’s never going to stop, you know.

Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Paying Citizens to Become Dependant

  1. rj says:

    You are right it ain’t never gonna stop till the bottom falls out. Today we have fourth and fifth generation welfare dependants. Children of folks like these never know anything different, have not a clue about the real world and are taught daily by example how to scam the system.

    The massive increases in the last few years was simply to hasten the process.

    There is no fix other than complete collapse and the destruction that follows then long years of very hard living by more and more untill
    we are not very much different than lots of other third world hell holes.

    All we can hope to accomplish from here on out is maintaining some geographical areas for freedom and conservatism to flourish and eventually expand.

    It used to be said that America was the last bastion of hope and freedom, in the future it will be said that individual states are the last bastions of freedom.

  2. mare says:

    We really are the suckers!

  3. DocO says:

    I’ve been thinking quite a bit about this phenomena.

    I think in essence the government is subsidizing many corporations that pay low wages.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a corporations are evil kinda guy.

    However, the god of unintended consequences never sleeps.

    Consider the restaurant industry. I would surmise that many, many of the employees of these companies qualify for some type of means tested transfer payments (food stamps, medicaid, etc.)

    Then consider say the energy industry, which generally has good paying jobs and most of the employees can’t take advantage of these transfer payments.

    It seems that an unintended consequence of these transfer payments is a warped labor market that certain industries can take advantage of.

  4. R.D. Walker says:

    That raises an interesting chicken or the egg question…

    Walmart pays minimum wage. Many minimum wage employees qualify for the dole. Anti-Walmart agitators tell us that low wages force the government to subsidize low paid workers.

    What if it is the other way around? What it the existence of the dole causes wages to be bid down in the labor force? After all, businesses only must pay what the market will bear.

    If minimum wage makes you $16,000 per year but qualifies you for an additional $40,000 per year in welfare benefits, you might just be willing to work for $16,000 a year and employers will find willing workers to be plentiful at that rate.

    If, on the other hand, $16,000 per year is all you get, people will try much harder to find better pay thus driving up the cost of labor.

    I think it is obvious that the dole causes low wages and not that low wages cause the dole.

  5. Bman says:

    I’ve worked with many, many waitresses at the bar who were single moms. They were on every single welfare-type program available, (plus they got child support). It was absolutely appalling to me, when I would hear them occasionally tell the bar manager, who did the scheduling, to make sure not to schedule them over x amount of hours otherwise they wouldn’t qualify anymore for certain programs. And there I was, begging for more hours so I wouldn’t be broke as a joke. True fucking story.

  6. Girl in Vancouver USA says:

    By golly, I just found my sugar daddy and will have more children!
    Not really…I am a single mother and fall into this income category. While I was pregnant and paying medical bills in advance (still paying by the way) I heard from friends all the time, “I bet now you wish you were poor so the government would pay your bills”. I can’t even begin to express how frustrating these comments were and still are to me.
    Yesterday, I was jokingly telling a friend that I needed to find a sugar daddy to pay the bills so I could find a less stressful job and not have to worry about my annual salary amount. Considering this graph I apparently don’t have to look very hard for a sugar daddy…why wouldn’t I consider working for a far less wage and be given so much assistance? Well, I wouldn’t because I’m a responsible person who doesn’t believe in getting things for free. I provide for my son and take responsibility for his well-being and needs, I pay my mortgage, my taxes, and I wouldn’t have it any other way. Sad that my efforts and ability to be responsible and independent don’t inspire other single mom’s to do the same.

  7. R.D. Walker says:

    Welcome to the Revo GiV. You sound like our kind of person.

  8. Bman says:

    Vancouver, Wa. Nice town. Ever been to Waddles? (If it’s still there). You should check it out ;) Welcome to the Revo!

  9. notamobster says:

    Welcome VanGirl!

  10. AW Mens says:

    Welcome GiV!

  11. pateriot says:

    Let us not forget Medicaid for yourself and your family. You would have to add another 8-10 thousand dollars a year (net) for the cost of insurance. Of course if you are on Medicaid you will run to the doctor’s every time you have a hangnail and require every test and medication in the books. For many families this adds hundreds of thousand dollars of governmental aide to support their bloated asses.

    Of course by the time that this filters through all of the governmental bureaucracy, we are paying half again to 2 times as much to support them. But hey, stop being such a mean hateful person and pay your “fair” share!!!!

  12. JenR says:

    I don’t have a problem with the person/family who uses Medicaid or welfare as a short term solution when having a hard time. What infuriates me is the many who abuse the system and ruin it for those who truly need it. Case in point. My father is 57 years old and in May was diagnosed with terminal cancer. There isn’t going to be a cure for him. With chemo treatments his doctors are hoping he will have 12 months to live. He has tumors on all of is bones from head to toe so is in a lot of pain. The chemo and cancer have taken a toll on him so while he has tried to work as often as he can, he has had to cut back on hours. His employer has been understanding but has said they will keep him employed through the end of this year and then will need to replace him. That means he will no longer have insurance. He has paid into the system as a full-time employee since he was 18 years old. We contacted Medicare but have been told he is too young to qualify and they will only make an exception if he’s been on disability for 2 years. He doesn’t have 2 years. He contacted his state Medicaid plan (he lives in Arizona) and they told him he could apply but they are so overwhelmed that they are only accepting pregnant women. So now we are faced with trying to figure out how chemo treatments, all of his meds, and hospice care are going to be paid for.

    Of course, with ObamaCare I’m sure the “medical panel” would’ve decided that it wasn’t worth giving him any treatment from Day 1.

  13. R.D. Walker says:

    I am so sorry about your father Jen.

    Your analysis is exactly correct. The system is overwhelmed by takers but that is quite on purpose. That is the point of Cloward and Piven: To overload the system until if collapses.

    They stated that full enrollment of those eligible for welfare “would produce bureaucratic disruption in welfare agencies and fiscal disruption in local and state governments” that would “deepen existing divisions among elements in the big-city Democratic coalition: the remaining white middle class, the working-class ethnic groups and the growing minority poor.

    The result would be a complete breakdown and socialist revolution.

    More here.

  14. James says:

    That’s the problem with collectivism, now isn’t it?

    If your father was allowed to take the medicare tax money he was forced to pay, and choose an insurance on his terms rather than politicians, he could have chosen to buy a policy that would care for him right now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>