5 ms·

The people with jobs paying taxes aren't very happy to support freeloaders simply taking unemployment because they don't want to work.

colinmhayes 5y ago
I feel happy enough with the situation. No one should be forced to work a shitty job imo.
- throwaway292893 5y ago
  Well I'm not. Now there's two anecdotes to work with. I worked a shitty job to get through college, it's a stepping stone. These jobs aren't meant to live on. They should be used as part time jobs for people transitioning in their careers, like students. When you give handouts to people who don't want to work you are not doing them any favors. They become reliant and trapped in that loop. That's not to say there shouldn't be a safety net with strict qualifications. You're doing no service to the people who need it by allowing those who don't. We should be spending money creating new, better paying jobs, not new social programs.
  - wildrhythms 5y ago
    We hear this same diatribe every time this topic comes up. "Fast food work is a stepping stone to a better job!" Have you been to a McDonalds or Wendys recently? Most of the workers are in their 30s-40s+. The concept of a low-wage "stepping stone" job is a fallacy that people have subscribed to to justify paying unlivable wages.
    - throwaway292893 5y ago
      That's not my experience, I mostly see teens and sometimes one or two adults. Do you have a source backing up that claim? > We should be spending money creating new, better paying jobs, not new social programs.
solosoyokaze 5y ago
I pay taxes and I'd be super happy if my money went to support people in this country without jobs. It would lower crime and increase the quality of life for everyone living here. I could also be one of those people someday. Unfortunately many of my tax dollars go to fund a military I find ethically abhorrent instead of improving the quality of life in the US.
iaw 5y ago
I pay my fair share of taxes and I'm happy to support 'freeloaders' when they're unemployed and need support. Especially if it leads to a universal living wage from employers. Don't speak for me please.
- throwaway292893 5y ago
  I'm speaking for me and those I know. My response was to GP saying everyone is happy. I am not. Also, I'm not talking about the people who need support, I'm talking about the people taking advantage and staying on unemployment because they don't want to work.
  - scollet 5y ago
    I may be missing what you mean by "taking advantage" but isn't that the point? Like taking advantage of a life raft after going overboard. If someone chooses to not be employed and it brings them basic needs and recuperation, then I see the system working well.
    - throwaway292893 5y ago
      You shouldn't be able to "choose to not be employed", someone else is picking up the slack for you and you are taking away benefits that could be used on someone that NEEDS it (disability, elderly, etc.) When others see that you can just give up and get paid, they will also become burnouts. Eventually you will run out of other people's money.
      - AlexandrB 5y ago
        I wish this logic was more frequently applied to large corporations and their externalities or to the military. How much money was flushed down the drain to develop dubious weapon systems like the F-35 or to clean up messes like Deepwater Horizon. Yet when we give ordinary people some money suddenly it's a moral failing on their part and we're "picking up the slack". Here's an idea: next time there's an oil spill, lets take the money for cleanup out of the executives' bank accounts (and investments, and properties) before we dig into the public coffers. Then we can talk about freeloaders at the bottom.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

colinmhayes 5y ago

I feel happy enough with the situation. No one should be forced to work a shitty job imo.

throwaway292893 5y ago
Well I'm not. Now there's two anecdotes to work with. I worked a shitty job to get through college, it's a stepping stone. These jobs aren't meant to live on. They should be used as part time jobs for people transitioning in their careers, like students. When you give handouts to people who don't want to work you are not doing them any favors. They become reliant and trapped in that loop. That's not to say there shouldn't be a safety net with strict qualifications. You're doing no service to the people who need it by allowing those who don't. We should be spending money creating new, better paying jobs, not new social programs.
- wildrhythms 5y ago
  We hear this same diatribe every time this topic comes up. "Fast food work is a stepping stone to a better job!" Have you been to a McDonalds or Wendys recently? Most of the workers are in their 30s-40s+. The concept of a low-wage "stepping stone" job is a fallacy that people have subscribed to to justify paying unlivable wages.
  - throwaway292893 5y ago
    That's not my experience, I mostly see teens and sometimes one or two adults. Do you have a source backing up that claim? > We should be spending money creating new, better paying jobs, not new social programs.

solosoyokaze 5y ago

I pay taxes and I'd be super happy if my money went to support people in this country without jobs. It would lower crime and increase the quality of life for everyone living here. I could also be one of those people someday. Unfortunately many of my tax dollars go to fund a military I find ethically abhorrent instead of improving the quality of life in the US.

iaw 5y ago

I pay my fair share of taxes and I'm happy to support 'freeloaders' when they're unemployed and need support. Especially if it leads to a universal living wage from employers. Don't speak for me please.

throwaway292893 5y ago
I'm speaking for me and those I know. My response was to GP saying everyone is happy. I am not. Also, I'm not talking about the people who need support, I'm talking about the people taking advantage and staying on unemployment because they don't want to work.
- scollet 5y ago
  I may be missing what you mean by "taking advantage" but isn't that the point? Like taking advantage of a life raft after going overboard. If someone chooses to not be employed and it brings them basic needs and recuperation, then I see the system working well.
  - throwaway292893 5y ago
    You shouldn't be able to "choose to not be employed", someone else is picking up the slack for you and you are taking away benefits that could be used on someone that NEEDS it (disability, elderly, etc.) When others see that you can just give up and get paid, they will also become burnouts. Eventually you will run out of other people's money.
    - AlexandrB 5y ago
      I wish this logic was more frequently applied to large corporations and their externalities or to the military. How much money was flushed down the drain to develop dubious weapon systems like the F-35 or to clean up messes like Deepwater Horizon. Yet when we give ordinary people some money suddenly it's a moral failing on their part and we're "picking up the slack". Here's an idea: next time there's an oil spill, lets take the money for cleanup out of the executives' bank accounts (and investments, and properties) before we dig into the public coffers. Then we can talk about freeloaders at the bottom.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]