Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam
No, 10%? of Americans would have a new reason why not to work.
As a stipend, I could see its abuse in employers paying their workers substandard wages so the workers would qualify for government support payments.
Even if the economics would make sense -- if a person gets $22,000/yr from the taxpayers they should sweep the sidewalks or pick up trash on the highway if they are physically able to work -- no free ride ...
If their gross income is over $22,000 (single person) why give them money for nothing? Maybe, some free education or something beneficial to society. |
You could make the argument that the combination of various welfare programs and the minimum wage already allow employers to pay substandard wages. Obviously, this doesn't happen in every business, but the stats show that the average Wal Mart store costs the tax payers $900K per year because many of the people that work there also get food stamps, housing assistance, child are assistance etc. The same goes for most fast food places, many retail and service jobs etc.
Sure, many of these jobs are not meant to raise a family on and are intended for people just starting out, but in reality there are a lot people working those jobs who are older and are trying to take care of families.
With welfare systems in place a person can work for a low wage and they have little incentive to try to make more because they will end up in that bubble where making more means less welfare benefits so it actually makes more financial sense for them to stay at the lower paying job. If there were no welfare programs it could force companies to pay more because people would demand a livable wage since there would be no other option.