3 ms·
The "point" of weakening the social safety net is not to "hurt" people in a downturn, but to shift economic incentives by changing a reward structure from non-w
by Helmet 9y ago
The "point" of weakening the social safety net is not to "hurt" people in a downturn, but to shift economic incentives by changing a reward structure from non-work/non-productive behavior to work/productive behavior.
How successful this policy is is debatable, but I think it's important clarify intentions and purposes.
- emodendroket 9y agoIn the end this is just a different spin on the essential premise that cutting the social safety net is using the threat of destitution to change behavior, and it seems plain that these kinds of changes hardly just affect people who are currently unemployed.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- DonnyV 9y agoI love the double standard and the underlining continuous servitude which is created with this statement. So the reason your not well off or have multiple homes is because you don't want to work. So lets give little Johnny or Maria a little whip to the back and make them earn the scraps we give them to keep themselves alive. Oh but if banks and corporations that have hollowed out the government coffers and pensions go under because of there gambling with derivatives. Well they need a blank check, or oil companies who have been making hand over fist in money for years, lets give them subsidies, or the company thats making a trillion dollar plane that doesn't even fly. Lets give them more money!!! I really wish we would stop picking on poor and down and out people and start making the 1% pay their fair share instead of everyone else paying for them to be the 1%.