5 ms·

This is ridiculous. The stereotype of welfare recipients as lazy, unemployed people is completely inaccurate. I'm a former Welfare Clerk, and the vast majority

This is ridiculous. The stereotype of welfare recipients as lazy, unemployed people is completely inaccurate. I'm a former Welfare Clerk, and the vast majority of welfare recipients I dealt with---in a district that covered West Philadelphia---were employed. The work varied: childcare, retail, and hair salon work were the most common, but there were also school staff, church secretaries, and construction workers who needed welfare. Some of these jobs were under the table, but most were legitimate, W-2 jobs. If anything, my district had a higher percentage of people not employed, as we covered the University of Pennsylvania and Drexel University campuses---so there were often grad students applying along side single mothers working in hair salons.

devonkim 11y ago
This is also consistent with those on food stamps. The last statistics I read that the majority were employed, disabled, or students.
yummyfajitas 11y ago
A quick google search suggests a significant portions of welfare dollars flow to non-workers: http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/04/13/get-a-job-most-welfare-recipients-already-have-one/ http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/04/13/get-a-job-most-wel... 36% of families receiving TANF (which is what this article discusses) work. Why not spend 30 seconds googling to determine if your anecdotes reflect reality?
- fredfoobar42 11y ago
  Typically, TANF benefits went to the elderly, disabled, or to new mothers. Do you really want to force them to work the gig economy? Also, don't forget that the "T" in TANF means _temporary_.
  - yummyfajitas 11y ago
    If only the authors of the article thought of that. Then they might have written this: Work requirements, however, should not unfairly punish people who are physically or mentally unable to complete gig economy jobs. The gig economy can often provide flexible work for those previously considered unable to work, but exemptions would still be available as needed. Why not read the article to see what it actually advocates rather than criticizing some unrelated idea no one advocated for?
    - pjc50 11y ago
      The process of assessing fitness to work then becomes much more controversial; there is a crackdown; genuinely disabled people fail to tick the right boxes; as their money supply is cut off, so is their food; this results in starvation, suicide, or at the very least exacerbation of their health problem. At least that's how it's turned out in the UK. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/aug/27/thousands-died-after-fit-for-work-assessment-dwp-figures http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/aug/27/thousands-die...
      - yummyfajitas 11y ago
        Your link provides no evidence of causality or even correlation between welfare cuts and death, or any evidence that even a single person starved. Strangely, the activists hyping these numbers don't seem to have even a single coroner's report of a person where cause of death is starvation. Clinton's welfare reform program in the US did not have this effect. The main effect was a reduction in the welfare rolls and an increase in the labor supply.
        anon1385 11y ago
        http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/28/man-starved-to-death-after-benefits-cut http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/28/man-starved-t... >Mark Wood, 44, who had a number of complex mental health conditions, died at his home last August, months after an Atos fitness-for-work assessment found him fit for work. This assessment triggered a decision by the jobcentre to stop his sickness benefits, leaving him just £40 a week to live on. His housing benefits were stopped at around the same time. >The Oxfordshire coroner, Darren Salter, said that although it was impossible to identify the cause of death, it was probably "caused or contributed to by Wood being markedly underweight and malnourished". He weighed 5st 8lbs (35kg) when he died; his doctor said his body mass index was not compatible with life.
        anon1385 11y ago
        http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/09/david-clapson-benefit-sanctions-death-government-policies http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/09/david-c... >The coroner said that when David Clapson died he had no food in his stomach. Clapson’s benefits had been stopped as a result of missing one meeting at the jobcentre. He was diabetic, and without the £71.70 a week from his jobseeker’s allowance he couldn’t afford to eat or put credit on his electricity card to keep the fridge where he kept his insulin working. Three weeks later Clapson died from diabetic ketoacidosis, caused by a severe lack of insulin. A pile of CVs was found next to his body.
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  That sounds like 64% (a majority) didn't?
danjayh 11y ago
If the vast majority were employed, then the proposal to require able-bodied individuals to work as a precondition for receiving welfare should only affect a small minority of people who have chosen to live off the system. Why is that ridiculous?

devonkim 11y ago

This is also consistent with those on food stamps. The last statistics I read that the majority were employed, disabled, or students.

yummyfajitas 11y ago

A quick google search suggests a significant portions of welfare dollars flow to non-workers: http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/04/13/get-a-job-most-welfare-recipients-already-have-one/ http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/04/13/get-a-job-most-wel... 36% of families receiving TANF (which is what this article discusses) work. Why not spend 30 seconds googling to determine if your anecdotes reflect reality?

fredfoobar42 11y ago
Typically, TANF benefits went to the elderly, disabled, or to new mothers. Do you really want to force them to work the gig economy? Also, don't forget that the "T" in TANF means _temporary_.
- yummyfajitas 11y ago
  If only the authors of the article thought of that. Then they might have written this: Work requirements, however, should not unfairly punish people who are physically or mentally unable to complete gig economy jobs. The gig economy can often provide flexible work for those previously considered unable to work, but exemptions would still be available as needed. Why not read the article to see what it actually advocates rather than criticizing some unrelated idea no one advocated for?
  - pjc50 11y ago
    The process of assessing fitness to work then becomes much more controversial; there is a crackdown; genuinely disabled people fail to tick the right boxes; as their money supply is cut off, so is their food; this results in starvation, suicide, or at the very least exacerbation of their health problem. At least that's how it's turned out in the UK. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/aug/27/thousands-died-after-fit-for-work-assessment-dwp-figures http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/aug/27/thousands-die...
    - yummyfajitas 11y ago
      Your link provides no evidence of causality or even correlation between welfare cuts and death, or any evidence that even a single person starved. Strangely, the activists hyping these numbers don't seem to have even a single coroner's report of a person where cause of death is starvation. Clinton's welfare reform program in the US did not have this effect. The main effect was a reduction in the welfare rolls and an increase in the labor supply.
      - anon1385 11y ago
        http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/28/man-starved-to-death-after-benefits-cut http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/28/man-starved-t... >Mark Wood, 44, who had a number of complex mental health conditions, died at his home last August, months after an Atos fitness-for-work assessment found him fit for work. This assessment triggered a decision by the jobcentre to stop his sickness benefits, leaving him just £40 a week to live on. His housing benefits were stopped at around the same time. >The Oxfordshire coroner, Darren Salter, said that although it was impossible to identify the cause of death, it was probably "caused or contributed to by Wood being markedly underweight and malnourished". He weighed 5st 8lbs (35kg) when he died; his doctor said his body mass index was not compatible with life.
      - anon1385 11y ago
        http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/09/david-clapson-benefit-sanctions-death-government-policies http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/09/david-c... >The coroner said that when David Clapson died he had no food in his stomach. Clapson’s benefits had been stopped as a result of missing one meeting at the jobcentre. He was diabetic, and without the £71.70 a week from his jobseeker’s allowance he couldn’t afford to eat or put credit on his electricity card to keep the fridge where he kept his insulin working. Three weeks later Clapson died from diabetic ketoacidosis, caused by a severe lack of insulin. A pile of CVs was found next to his body.
JoeAltmaier 11y ago
That sounds like 64% (a majority) didn't?

danjayh 11y ago

If the vast majority were employed, then the proposal to require able-bodied individuals to work as a precondition for receiving welfare should only affect a small minority of people who have chosen to live off the system. Why is that ridiculous?