Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Liberal Insights

(109 posts)
12. Have any of the respondents above BEEN on welfare?
Sun May 15, 2016, 09:15 AM
May 2016

I haven't seen any evidence that any of the respondents above have BEEN on welfare.
Welfare for those with low-incomes is DIFFERENT in every state, because that is the level where welfare is handled. So I can only speak from experience in MY state. But I doubt this much differs in OTHER states:

1. The state ONLY gives help to people whom it recognizes as "needy" (or whatever term they use).
2. The state DEFINES the amount of income BELOW WHICH it recognizes as "needy" and DESERVING of assistance, and ABOVE WHICH people are deemed NOT NEEDY and NOT DESERVING of assistance.

I've been through this, and there was no sliding scale or anything. Our circumstances made us entitled to some very helpful benefits for a while. But, once our family's income WENT UP just a little, and exceeded their "CAP", our assistance was IMMEDIATELY TERMINATED, as we were no longer considered "needy." That's the way it works.

Who care's if you're "a bleeding heart liberal" - as am I - if, while INTENDING to help the working-poor by raising their minimum wage, you cause the UNINTENDED consequence of making them LOSE MORE in the end, than they GAIN in the short run? I'm not OPPOSED to raising the minimum wage for the working-poor . I am FOR making their lives BETTER OVER ALL!

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Will the poor LOSE benefi...»Reply #12