Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1 CATO White Paper: The Work versus Welfare Trade-Off: 2013 
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    White Paper
    The Work versus Welfare Trade-Off: 2013
    http://www.cato.org/publications/whi...-welfare-trade

    August 19, 2013

    Executive Summary:

    In 1995, the Cato Institute published a groundbreaking study, The Work vs. Welfare Trade-Off, which estimated the value of the full package of welfare benefits available to a typical recipient in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. It found that not only did the value of such benefits greatly exceed the poverty level but, because welfare benefits are tax-free, their dollar value was greater than the amount of take-home income a worker would receive from an entry-level job.

    Since then, many welfare programs have undergone significant change, including the 1996 welfare reform legislation that ended the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program and replaced it with the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program. Accordingly, this paper examines the current welfare system in the same manner as the 1995 paper. Welfare benefits continue to outpace the income that most recipients can expect to earn from an entry-level job, and the balance between welfare and work may actually have grown worse in recent years.

    The current welfare system provides such a high level of benefits that it acts as a disincentive for work. Welfare currently pays more than a minimum-wage job in 35 states, even after accounting for the Earned Income Tax Credit, and in 13 states it pays more than $15 per hour. If Congress and state legislatures are serious about reducing welfare dependence and rewarding work, they should consider strengthening welfare work requirements, removing exemptions, and narrowing the definition of work. Moreover, states should consider ways to shrink the gap between the value of welfare and work by reducing current benefit levels and tightening eligibility requirements.

    Introduction
    There is little doubt that one of the most important long-term steps toward avoiding or getting out of poverty is taking a job. Only 2.6 percent of full-time workers are poor, as defined by the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) standard, compared with 23.9 percent of adults who do not work. Even part-time work makes a significant difference; only 15 percent of part-time workers are poor.1 And while many anti-poverty activists decry lowwage jobs, a minimum-wage job can be a springboard out of poverty.

    Moreover, while periods of high unemployment undoubtedly make it harder for individuals to find work, especially lowskilled workers, the relationship between unemployment rates and the number of families on the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) welfare program is tenuous at best, as indicated in Figure 1.2 Contrary to stereotypes, there is no evidence that people on welfare are lazy or do not wish to work. Indeed, surveys of welfare recipients consistently show their desire for a job. At the same time, however, the evidence suggests that many are reluctant to accept available employment opportunities.

    Despite the work requirements included in the 1996 welfare reform, nationwide less than 42 percent of adult welfare recipients are actually working. The actual work participation may be much lower than that. Many recipients credited as working do not have jobs, but are participating in other “work activities” such as job training or job search. In fact, less than 20 percent of recipients have unsubsidized private-sector jobs.





    The entire paper can be read at http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.or...ff_2013_wp.pdf.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,788
    I checked out the worst offender, Hawaii, and it turns out 48% of the number (23,798 out of 49,175) is housing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    I checked out the worst offender, Hawaii, and it turns out 48% of the number (23,798 out of 49,175) is housing.
    and?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    and?
    And what? Do with it what you will. I don't give a shit.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Power CUer NJCardFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    15,895
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    And what? Do with it what you will. I don't give a shit.
    Then don't bring it up, shit for brains.
    The Obama Administration: Deny. Deflect. Blame.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,788
    Quote Originally Posted by NJCardFan View Post
    Then don't bring it up, shit for brains.
    Thanks for your input.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Thanks for your input.
    And yours. What's the point of bringing up an abstract statistic that has no bearing on the discussion? Hawaii has higher housing costs, but it still subsidizes them for welfare recipients, so that they can live a middle class lifestyle without paying for one.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    And yours. What's the point of bringing up an abstract statistic that has no bearing on the discussion? Hawaii has higher housing costs, but it still subsidizes them for welfare recipients, so that they can live a middle class lifestyle without paying for one.
    Do they have the same federal minimum wage laws as other states where $23,000 a year will get you a mint 3-2 1920's Craftsman on the nice side of town?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Do they have the same federal minimum wage laws as other states where $23,000 a year will get you a mint 3-2 1920's Craftsman on the nice side of town?
    Well, considering that it's a federal minimum wage, imposed on all of the states (and, BTW, what is the Constitutional authority for that?), then obviously they have the same minimum wage laws, at a minimum. As to whether that will buy you a mint Craftsman home, it's unlikely, but then, I don't know anyplace this side of Detroit where you can buy a home for $23,000 per year.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Well, considering that it's a federal minimum wage, imposed on all of the states (and, BTW, what is the Constitutional authority for that?), then obviously they have the same minimum wage laws, at a minimum. As to whether that will buy you a mint Craftsman home, it's unlikely, but then, I don't know anyplace this side of Detroit where you can buy a home for $23,000 per year.
    $23,000 a year is more than enough to cover the mortgage on this one. And I didn't even look that hard.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •