2 ms·
In Australia, you're considered employed if you get at least one hour of work per week. And there's a fairly strict cap on how much you can earn before unemploy
by naruhodo 3y ago
In Australia, you're considered employed if you get at least one hour of work per week. And there's a fairly strict cap on how much you can earn before unemployment benefits are cut off, meaning the under-employed must carefully navigate the gap between full unemployment and adequate earnings that pay all their bills.
Is that how it works in the US?
- dghlsakjg 3y agoThe US unemployment system is run on a state by state basis. So there’s a lot of different requirements and caveats. When I was unemployed I had to report any income so it could be deducted from my payment as well as what jobs I had applied to that week. I was receiving benefits from Washington state (fairly liberal) which were pretty generous and the requirements were pretty easy to comply with. Other states make it much harder and are far less generous. More broadly though, the “welfare trap” that you describe is definitely a thing. I’m not in the states anymore, but the best healthcare I ever had was when I went back to school and qualified for “Medicaid” through the state of Colorado because my income was close to 0. That health plan was far better than any that are offered for sale so I had to make sure to not exceed the income threshold until I took a high paying dev job that came with good benefits.
- samtheprogram 3y agoSort of, I’m not sure if the earnings cap for welfare is at a similar level to the US, but somewhere between underemployed and full-time welfare also cuts off, so people face similar decision making. EDIT: reading the sibling comment, I want to clarify I’m only speaking anecdotally. Everyone I know to ever have gone on welfare (at least those I was close enough with to discuss) lived in Pennsylvania state.