5 ms·
What the author is suggesting is not creating an incentive, it's creating at threat. Take the job offered (no matter what it is), or become homeless. It's mis
by lokar 5y ago
What the author is suggesting is not creating an incentive, it's creating at threat. Take the job offered (no matter what it is), or become homeless.
It's misleading to engage in this labor debate (support vs jobs, etc) without also including a discussion of poverty. Our system is constructed to keep a large group of workers just at poverty level where they have no real options but to take work offered on any terms.
The enhancement of unemployment benefits has revealed this normally hidden dynamic.
This is just as much about a semi-permanent class of exploited low wage workers as it is about lazy people preferring unemployment to work.
- ryan93 5y agoPoverty level compared to what country. Even 15 an hour in most places and you won’t go hungry or homeless.
- hackeraccount 5y agoThat makes it sound like places are offering 40 hours (plus benefits) at $15 an hour. 40 hours plus benefits at $10 an hour would be a pretty good deal but the benefits part is so expensive that the $10/hour is close to an after thought for the people doing the hiring. So you get 10-15 an hour for 20 hours a week here. And the same deal there. And sometimes at a 3rd job because it's not really 20 hours, some weeks it's 10. And you've got a juggle all of this which is next to impossible.
- ryan93 5y agoGood point. Regular hours would solve a lot of issues.