This sounds like using the existing unemployment system to hack in UBI and universal healthcare.
how else where you going to implement UBI?
Should people who quit get unemployment benefits, too?
121–130 of 147 posts
Re: Should people who quit get unemployment benefits, too?
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cue inflation. A better solution is to tax capital gains and corporate income at a rate that is closer to personal income taxes so that everyone pays their fair share.
I think the US has enough tax money it just needs to use it more efficiently. If you look at the government revenue per capita of the US it isn't that far off from Germany or Japan. Construction in Japan certainly has a higher price floor than in the US so there is no excuse there, and the various government offices in Japan operate quickly and efficiently despite offering much lower pay and worse hours, in a much st…
I agree that there's a culture problem, if the line at the DMV (which, who goes there these days, so much can be pre-handled online) is the worst government interaction you can think of, you're doing pretty well for yourself.
Re: Should people who quit get unemployment benefits, too?
#123Which is the greater moral hazard? Enabling couch-potatoes or enabling corps to have a 40 hour worker at below the poverty line cost?
The greatest threat is a couch potato who is going into a job they hate to bring everyone down with them.
People talk about the 1x engineer vs the 10x engineer, but less is said about the -5x engineer who drags everybody down with them and makes them hate work.
Re: Should people who quit get unemployment benefits, too?
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one is quitting their job to just be on unemployment. I can understand someone who is unemployed and actively searching for a professional job to believe that, but I think that looks at the issue from a privileged position. No one is quitting their professional offices jobs just to be on unemployment, but I don't think the same can be said of lower income sh*t jobs. Such a declarative statement of "no one" cannot…
Low wage jobs only net you $40 a week. Thats $160 a month. Even if you pay no income tax, try living on $160 a month in any where America. Thats barely enough to pay for groceries for a single person for a month.
Food banks and SNAP/EBT and dumpster diving and community living. It's a lower standard of living in some ways, for sure, but you don't have to go to work and get to do art all day long. What's that worth to you?
Re: Should people who quit get unemployment benefits, too?
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think anyone in America is working 40 hours and staying below the poverty line unless they have like... 8 kids as a single parent. It's really just not possible. McDonald's for 40 hours puts you well above poverty line
> McDonald's for 40 hours puts you well above poverty line where the hell in America is that true? "well above" -- definitely not.
Federal minimum wage : $7.25 per hour
40h work week: $290 per week
52 weeks per year: $15,080.00
Federal Poverty level for 2024(family of 1): $15,060
https://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/federal-poverty-level-fp...
McDonalds average pay(Crew Member): $13.03 per hour
https://www.indeed.com/cmp/McDonald's/salaries/Crew-Member
40 hour work week: $521.2 per week
52 weeks per year: $27.102.40
Average McDonalds pay for crew member puts you above Federal Poverty Level for a family of 3 ($25,820).
If you take the family of 1 numbers, you are $12,042.4 above poverty. Almost double. I think that qualifies for well above.
I also don't think it is good living but take it up with the federal government if you want to talk about where the Poverty Line and Inflation numbers come from, since they are the ones who like to screw with it to make themselves look good.
Edit: I missed the part about requiring an absurd number of dependents, that isn't true. With one dependent, numbers don't look that bad but having 2(family of 3) you are basically living hand to mouth with no savings.
Re: Should people who quit get unemployment benefits, too?
#126Yes, but with limits. How to prevent job hopping just to stay on benefits? Taking a paid vacation before the next job? I see opportunities for abuse. In the United States at least, AFAIK, employers pay for unemployment. Who pays when the employee voluntarily separates from an employer? It seems unfair to make the employer pay for an employee who left and no longer works there. I presume that cost will be paid by the…
No one is quitting their job to just be on unemployment. Unemployment benefit is funded by unemployment tax on both corporations and individuals. The unemployment benefit for CA is $40 to $450 per week. (You still have to pay income tax on that) Its much lower in conservative states. Its enough to smooth things out but not enough to live off of, you are still going to be digging into savings. Additionally you have to…
> Its not like I can take a holiday in europe and still collect.
Legally, ethically, or morally? In the history of the world, there are definitely people who've done this, though the smarter move is to take a holiday in East Asia like the Philippines or somewhere else super LCOL rather than Europe.
Re: Should people who quit get unemployment benefits, too?
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would say couch potato. a body at rest tends to stay at rest, and a body in motion tends to stay in motion, so I think someone already working is more likely to change jobs, put pressure on the employer etc. Couch potato IMHO is much less likely over time to change his situation, let alone join union, be part of some change etc.
People who sit at home doing nothing tend to get very depressed and ‘self medicate’ (drink, smoke, eat, etc) to fight that depression. I like to believe that most people really don’t want to get to that point and the reason they quit is not to basically slow-suicide. I don’t know about the numbers, but as I saw in my life, most people want to keep busy as they don’t know what to do with themselves. Sure there are exc…
It's all terrible working conditions and awful bosses until you have too much free time and have to start contemplating the meaning of your own life. Then you REALLY have hard work to do or succumb to the impending nihilism.
Re: Should people who quit get unemployment benefits, too?
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who pays $7.25? People quote that antiquated law as if it's a mandated wage. Fast food pays $15-20
Five states have not adopted a state minimum wage: Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee. Two states, Georgia and Wyoming, have a minimum wage below $7.25 per hour. In all seven of these states, the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour applies. Most other states have higher minimums, but those in most cases have not kept up with inflation. But in virtually all states you're broke af working…
You can look here at McDonalds jobs in small towns across Louisiana (randomly taken from your list). Avoiding cities because pay is higher there. Even in places like Pineville LA (pop 14k), they are starting fry cooks at double the federal minimum.
https://www.indeed.com/q-mcdonalds-application-l-louisiana-j...
Re: Should people who quit get unemployment benefits, too?
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
> McDonald's for 40 hours puts you well above poverty line where the hell in America is that true? "well above" -- definitely not.
Federal minimum wage : $7.25 per hour 40h work week: $290 per week 52 weeks per year: $15,080.00 Federal Poverty level for 2024(family of 1): $15,060 https://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/federal-poverty-level-fp... McDonalds average pay(Crew Member): $13.03 per hour https://www.indeed.com/cmp/McDonald's/salaries/Crew-Member 40 hour work week: $521.2 per week 52 weeks per year: $27.102.40 Average McDonalds pay for crew…
Spotted the person who's never been a retail/fast food wage slave. You don't get 40 hours. At best you'll get 34 or whatever makes it so you aren't classified as full time. And that's a good week. If corporate is trying to save hours, you might get 8 or 10 that week. You'll need a second job, obviously, but given that there's no set schedule, you'll spend even more time trying to coordinate the two.
Re: Should people who quit get unemployment benefits, too?
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps - as in most developed countries - the point shouldn't be whether or not the applicant 'deserves' unemployment benefits. But rather, whether they can afford to live without them.
Yeah, I mean, it's not so much "deserving", it's "qualifies for", and those qualifications seem to be "can fill out the paperwork" which is probably fine. Living without income is a foregone conclusion in 99.9% of cases, of course they can't, which is why they were working in the first place. Realistically, the whole system would be best rebranded as Temp-UBI, run it like Alimony, where X years at a job = X UBI time,…
No I'm not with you at all. The point of social welfare should not be to ensure continuity of income. That's what private unemployment insurance is for. State mandate contributions towards that if you like. But social welfare different. It's what stands between the average person and a couple of unfortunate health or life events (say an arrest) resulting in destitution or homelessness. It might be normalised for this to be a fact of life in the US, but that does't make it civilised or rational.