7 ms·
Wikipedia says you only get unemployment benefits for 6 months in the US, is that correct? Seems quite harsh.
by thesimon 10y ago
Wikipedia says you only get unemployment benefits for 6 months in the US, is that correct? Seems quite harsh.
- toomuchtodo 10y agoIts dependent on each state, but that's close enough to average, yes.
- Tharkun 10y agoWhat happens after that?
- thesimon 10y agoLooks like there are no more state payments and you have to depend on charities, family or friends.
- toomuchtodo 10y agoCorrect. Or you become destitute/homeless.
- refurb 10y agoWhat? No. You go on welfare. And get free healthcare through Medicaid. As much as people outside the US like to think it's some sort of heartless society, the US has a substantial safety net setup.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> You go on welfare. If you have children, you may qualify for whatever your states implementation of Temporary Assistance for Needy Family (TANF) is -- which has a work requirement. If not, your jurisdiction may have a "General Assistance" program, but these tend to be very small benefits, and often restricted in how long someone deemed "employable", whether or not they actually can find employment, can be on them (either in total, or within a given period; e.g., some jurisdictions have something like a 3-months in any 12-month period limit.) > As much as people outside the US like to think it's some sort of heartless society, the US has a substantial safety net setup. The US has an extraordinarily weak social safety net compared to most other developed countries.
- JBReefer 10y agoWhat about compared to Singapore or Japan?
- dragonwriter 10y ago> What about compared to Singapore or Japan? Not deeply familiar with either, but on review of a brief overview of the Japanese system it seems substantially more robust than the US system (though it also seems to have many similar structural difficulties.)
- the_ancient 10y agoAllow me to quote one of our Founding Fathers "I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." -- Benjamin Franklin
- dragonwriter 10y agoIf you want to argue that a very weak social Assagai net is a good thing, feel free. "Ben Franklin said so based on, at best, personal anecdotes" probably isn't the most compelling argument for that position but, in any case, e point is that the US system is weak, whether that's desirable or not, contrary to the upthread suggestion that it is substantial.
- the_ancient 10y agoI actually argue to replace all Social Safety Nets, all Universal Healthcare, every government program with UBI... I do not believe the government should provide Food, Home, or Healthcare assistance to any. I do however believe every person should enjoy basic income level to buy those things for themselves http://forum.somethingtoconsidermovement.com/t/geolibertarianism-universal-basic-income-derived-from-commons-rent/46 http://forum.somethingtoconsidermovement.com/t/geolibertaria...
- tssva 10y agoGetting on welfare and Medicaid is not as simple as you seem to think nor is it quick. Also if you are a male without any kids in most states you are out of luck.
- maxerickson 10y agoIn states with Medicaid expansion, men with no children do qualify for Medicaid.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- toomuchtodo 10y ago> As much as people outside the US like to think it's some sort of heartless society, the US has a substantial safety net setup. This is not true whatsoever.
- refurb 10y agoThen please explain the 50% of the federal budget that goes to our social safety net. That's not substantial to you?
- toomuchtodo 10y agoMedicare and Social Security, that you're only entitled to after you're above 62-67. (Depending on birth date) Anyone not elderly is SOL.
- Futurebot 10y agoIn California, one of the most generous states with welfare, here's what it looks like for a single person with no children: WORK REQUIREMENT Non-assistance CalFresh recipient over age 17 and under age 50 must satisfy the ABAWD work requirement as a condition of eligibility unless they meet specified exemption criteria or live in an area where the ABAWD work requirement is waived. ABAWDs cannot receive CalFresh (food stamps) for more than three months in a 36-month period unless they meet this requirement or are excused from it. The ABAWD work requirement is met by performing one of the following: Working at least 20 hours per week in paid or volunteer employment; Participating at least 20 hours per week in an allowable work activity such as vocational training or basic education programs; or Participating in workfare (i.e., community service). The number of hours of participation in workfare is determined by dividing the CalFresh allotment by the higher of the state or federal minimum wage. Max benefit: $174 a month(!) Compare Germany: If a worker is not eligible for the full unemployment benefits or after receiving the full unemployment benefit for the maximum of 12 months, he is able to apply for benefits from the so-called Arbeitslosengeld II (Hartz IV) programme, an open-ended welfare programme which, unlike the US system, ensures people do not fall into penury. A person receiving Hartz IV benefits is paid 404 EUR (2016) a month for living expenses plus the cost of adequate housing (including heating) and health care. Couples can receive benefits for each partner. Germany does not have an EBT (electronic benefits transfer) card system in place and, instead, disburses welfare in cash or via direct deposit onto the recipient's bank account.
- infinite8s 10y agoNot only that, in Germany you have universal health care, while in California (or anywhere else in the US) you will be uninsured (you can still be treated in the ER of any hospital, but that's not going to help in preventative situations).
- refurb 10y agoUh.... no. Read my original post. Medicaid is available to low income individuals. In fact, it was expanded (in most states) up to ~175% of the federal poverty level. You can get it even when you have a job!
- vt240 10y agoAt least in Washington State, unemployment payout is almost immediate, within two weeks of losing your job. You can use the time before it runs out to apply for other federal or state assistance programs. These may take longer and have more complex qualifications.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> You can use the time before it runs out to apply for other federal or state assistance programs. Which if you are a non-disabled, employable (whether or not employed) adult without dependents, in most parts of the US, are extremely limited, quantitatively and, often, temporally, as well.
- metasean 10y agoDifferent states have different time frames and may have conditions on those. I was laid off a while back. Because I got a severance package comparable to 1.5 months salary, I couldn't get unemployment assistance for 1.5 months plus 4 weeks - even then I had to document that I had applied to a minimum of 3 jobs a week from the day I was laid off.
- vt240 10y agoMy only first hand experience is with Washington. When I was furloughed in 2008 it was relatively easy and pain free to receive benefits, at least by government standards. My room mate at the time was only able to find part time work in retail at the end of unemployment and was easily able to obtain supplemental food assistance from the state. I won't argue the rules and regulations are a complex mess. For example, I would think it would be easy and in the governments best interest to try and transition people from the unemployment program into school/university programs, but that is near impossible with the way the regulations are written.
- eumoria 10y agoUnemployment benefits aren't the same as welfare they're paid into by your employer so when you're laid off you can maintain some kind of salary while you find work elsewhere. There are tax based welfare systems in place in the United States that provide assistance to people in poverty but it isn't the same system as "unemployment" (as it's generally referred to here)
- subie 10y agoAlso while you're receiving unemployment you have to apply to two jobs every week or two weeks.
- thesimon 10y agoCheers. Probably makes sense considering the "freedom" mentality in the US where everyone has to work for himself compared to the welfare state mentality in Europe. Actually makes me feel a bit good for paying my taxes :)
- toomuchtodo 10y agoKudos. I like your style. I paid $42K in federal taxes last year, I'd pay more to get universal healthcare and real social safety nets here.
- jessaustin 10y agoIf you'd pay more taxes, would you also simply donate more toward such efforts? If not, would you donate under some Kickstarter-like scheme in which pledges of donation were only enforced in the event that some threshold were met? Congratulations on your income!
- toomuchtodo 10y ago> If you'd pay more taxes, would you also simply donate more toward such efforts? I currently am, but to Watsi.org. It gives me a bigger bang per dollar compared to the amount of middlemen in the US healthcare model. I've thought about several ways to drive down the healthcare in the US, and it seems the only sure fire method is for politicians to get into office who believe in single payer. To that end, I use my wealth to max out my contributions to campaigns and PACs (if applicable) of candidates who support that goal. > Congratulations on your income! No need for that at all. I only mention it because, so often, I hear people say, "I'm tired of taxes! Less taxes! You already tax me enough!". To which I say, "Its complicated". I mention it because there are people out there (like myself) who do not mind paying taxes. With my tax dollars, I buy civilization. I would like to buy more civilization for my fellow humans, but I need their help as well, otherwise my efforts are wasted into the ether by themselves. We are all in this together.
- Annatar 10y agoCharities and donations will not truly solve the problem. United States needs major reforms: 1. implement what I term socio-capitalism (private property and enterpreneurship is protected, but there is a social safety net in the form of universal health care and unemployment benefits) -- U.S. already made the first step with "Obamacare", but there is a lot more to do; 2. reform the government to reflect the Swiss model 1:1, and institute direct democracy, as well as make lobbying highly illegal. Admittedly reforming the government will be a very difficult task, for those in power will fight by every means available to preserve it. The good news is, it could be done through the current political process.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- ck2 10y agoAnd in the USA you might not get any benefits at all, depends how long you worked, if you previously got benefits and how you lost the job (fired vs let go vs quit, etc)
- chefkoch 10y agoHow is it that people don't starve, especially the ones with mental health problems? Or does it happen and just is so accepted it is not worth reporting?
- ars 10y agoBecause food is extremely cheap. It's not good food, but it's food. You can get 2,000 calories for under $4, it doesn't take long to panhandle for $4. On top of those half of the food available is thrown away, so those who are very motivated go and take it. And then there are lots of organizations that help people with food, religious organizations mainly but not exclusively. Basically if someone really needs food and is not picky about it, it's available.
- ck2 10y agoUh, some people do not want to panhandle or turn to prostitution, or religion for that matter, they try to maintain what little self-respect they have in that state of mind.
- aidenn0 10y agoLargely through private charity. People with mental health problems also tend to die fairly young on the streets. I live somewhere with a friendly climate to the homeless, and the chronic homeless are mostly well under 40 or retirees who can no longer make rent.
- ck2 10y agoPeople do "starve" unless they are savvy enough. There is often help for families but not individuals without children. When I was homeless and living out of my car I actually had a hard time getting food stamps back then (this was a long time ago). First I had the problem I was in a southern state which are mostly Republican controlled and don't want to help people. Secondly I had an impossible time proving I didn't have income (how do you prove a negative?) Then the problem I didn't have an address. Oh there was also a problem someone had the same name as me elsewhere in the state and was already getting benefits. I showed the case worker my car I was living out of and eventually she put in some kind of emergency request so a few days later I got something. If it had gotten any worse I would have had to turn to a church charity for help, fortunately did not come to that. It is no accident the states set it up that way so you have to turn to religion, it is disgusting.
- ryanSrich 10y agoDepends on a bunch of factors. I've seen people who have reapplied and received it for years. I think the cutoff is 2 years under any circumstances. You have to prove that you're actually looking for a job to continue extending.
- tedmiston 10y agoIs it more generous outside of the U.S.?