Does welfare make people lazy?

[rightwinger]

Does welfare make people lazy? - The Week

The best way to measure whether the unemployed are behaving lazily is by examining the ratio of job seekers to job openings. If the problem is that unemployed people are slacking off work to enjoy the fruits of government welfare, we would expect to see a shortage of labor in the economy. Employers trying to recruit workers to expand their businesses would come up against the fact that job seekers are in short supply. Job vacancies would go unfilled and wages would be bid upward as businesses fight to recruit scarce labor away from the easy option of free welfare money. In such a scenario, cutting welfare would incentivize work, and help businesses fill vacancies.

And here is where the evidence undercuts conservative attacks on welfare. The data shows decisively that the problem is not laziness at all, but a lack of job openings. There are still three jobseekers for every job opening. In the dark days following the 2008 recession, that ratio was as high as seven people for every job opening. Wage growth remains weak. Surely there are still people who would rather claim welfare than try to work, but with so few jobs available, these people don't make a real difference. Trying to nudge them off welfare won't expand the supply of jobs. It would increase the number of people looking for a job — and remember, there are already not enough jobs for those seeking employment

 

[chikenwing]

Does welfare make people lazy? - The Week

For some certainly,having seen generational welfare daily,a yes is correct.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Here's the counterargument to what I just laid out: The number of job openings does not accurately represent the amount of work that is potentially available in the economy. Without welfare, the poor would have to find a way to eat and put a roof over their heads without the assistance of government. They would make their own jobs. In many poor countries, for instance, those with nothing to eat must sell trinkets or food on the side of the road. Desperation forces them to scrounge up some sort of money-making enterprise. So, the argument goes, welfare is still a job-killer because there are lots of jobs that would be created if life were even tougher for welfare recipients.

I don't dispute that cutting welfare would make job-seekers more desperate. But that is not the same thing as creating more jobs. Without a strong enough supply of jobs for current levels of jobseekers, pushing more people into the job market is a recipe for desperation and misery rather than economic growth. It might lead to more trinket-sellers and window-washers at the roadside (as well as more thieves, hustlers, prostitutes, and beggars), but there is no guarantee that any of these people would make enough money to support themselves or their families.

Boom!

 

[bedowin62]

Does welfare make people lazy? - The Week

The best way to measure whether the unemployed are behaving lazily is by examining the ratio of job seekers to job openings. If the problem is that unemployed people are slacking off work to enjoy the fruits of government welfare, we would expect to see a shortage of labor in the economy. Employers trying to recruit workers to expand their businesses would come up against the fact that job seekers are in short supply. Job vacancies would go unfilled and wages would be bid upward as businesses fight to recruit scarce labor away from the easy option of free welfare money. In such a scenario, cutting welfare would incentivize work, and help businesses fill vacancies.

And here is where the evidence undercuts conservative attacks on welfare. The data shows decisively that the problem is not laziness at all, but a lack of job openings. There are still three jobseekers for every job opening. In the dark days following the 2008 recession, that ratio was as high as seven people for every job opening. Wage growth remains weak. Surely there are still people who would rather claim welfare than try to work, but with so few jobs available, these people don't make a real difference. Trying to nudge them off welfare won't expand the supply of jobs. It would increase the number of people looking for a job — and remember, there are already not enough jobs for those seeking employment

ur right leftard; every penny of the welfare is justified; obama is such a failure there isno way welfare and unemployment can be cut back from where it is now; at the RECORD, EMERGENCY LEVELS set at the end of the Bush years left-wing losers keep whining about.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Don't mix up Welfare and Unemployment.

 

[Claudette]

What a dumbass question. Of course it does.

Why in hell would anyone want to go out and get a job when someone elses money is paying the bills??

Why in hell would someone actually want to work for a living when a living is being provided for them??

Why in hell would someone want to get off the gravy train when someone else is pulling it for em??

 

[bedowin62]

Don't mix up Welfare and Unemployment.

sure; but the idiotic Left is insisting that Republicans are heartless savages for just asking why neither can be cut by one penny or one day from the emergency levels set at the end of the Bush years

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Don't mix up Welfare and Unemployment.

sure; but the idiotic Left is insisting that Republicans are heartless savages for just asking why neither can be cut by one penny or one day from the emergency levels set at the end of the Bush years

Politics. Learn the third rails, and don't step on them.

 

[rightwinger]

What a dumbass question. Of course it does.

Why in hell would anyone want to go out and get a job when someone elses money is paying the bills??

Why in hell would someone actually want to work for a living when a living is being provided for them??

Why in hell would someone want to get off the gravy train when someone else is pulling it for em??

Its a question of cause and effect

Does making poor people suffer more increase the likelyhood that they will be able to get a job from which they can support themselves?

Based on current jobs data ....the answer is probably no

 

[ClosedCaption]

What a dumbass question. Of course it does.

Why in hell would anyone want to go out and get a job when someone elses money is paying the bills??

Why in hell would someone actually want to work for a living when a living is being provided for them??

Why in hell would someone want to get off the gravy train when someone else is pulling it for em??

Because its in human nature to be self reliant and self sufficient - Govt doesnt remove that quality

Its not...The most anyone can get is what govt will allow. Which aint much and it dam sure aint something you can get comfortable with

See answer #1

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The fact that a person even has to ask this question - just shows the insanity of the left when it comes to economics.
30 years of glaring data pointing so clearly to 'yes' - doesn't matter. Some facility lounge wine sniffer writes an article - and *poof* - 30 years of data just disappears.

 

[Spiderman]

Don't mix up Welfare and Unemployment.

Boom

 

[rightwinger]

The fact that a person even has to ask this question - just shows the insanity of the left when it comes to economics.
30 years of glaring data pointing so clearly to 'yes' - doesn't matter. Some facility lounge wine sniffer writes an article - and *poof* - 30 years of data just disappears.

Can you point to any data indicating that reducing welfare makes people more likely to get a job?

If there are currently three candidates right now for every job opening, what makes you think a welfare candidate would get that job?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Look ta the idiot that wrote this piece.......hahahahahahaha

 

[iamwhatiseem]

yep - he's the expert!!!

Bwhahahahahahahaha

 

[bedowin62]

The fact that a person even has to ask this question - just shows the insanity of the left when it comes to economics.
30 years of glaring data pointing so clearly to 'yes' - doesn't matter. Some facility lounge wine sniffer writes an article - and *poof* - 30 years of data just disappears.

Can you point to any data indicating that reducing welfare makes people more likely to get a job?

If there are currently three candidates right now for every job opening, what makes you think a welfare candidate would get that job?

welfare was restricted under clinton; continued at the limited level until obama expanded it

i must have missed all those people starving in the streets that the Left predicted

libs are losers who lie and pander; then move on to the next lies and pandering

 

[Avorysuds]

It did in the OP's case... He's fine with stealing from the US tax payers while providing us nothing of value.

 

[ClosedCaption]

The fact that a person even has to ask this question - just shows the insanity of the left when it comes to economics.
30 years of glaring data pointing so clearly to 'yes' - doesn't matter. Some facility lounge wine sniffer writes an article - and *poof* - 30 years of data just disappears.

Can you point to any data indicating that reducing welfare makes people more likely to get a job?

If there are currently three candidates right now for every job opening, what makes you think a welfare candidate would get that job?

No, this is all about gut feelings with them. No facts or data will change their minds.

For example: They say that welfare makes people not want to find a job. Then when you show them the majority of people on welfare are the WORKING poor....meaning they have a job. The right shrugs and says it again as if facts dont matter

 

[Avorysuds]

The fact that a person even has to ask this question - just shows the insanity of the left when it comes to economics.
30 years of glaring data pointing so clearly to 'yes' - doesn't matter. Some facility lounge wine sniffer writes an article - and *poof* - 30 years of data just disappears.

Can you point to any data indicating that reducing welfare makes people more likely to get a job?

If there are currently three candidates right now for every job opening, what makes you think a welfare candidate would get that job?

No, this is all about gut feelings with them. No facts or data will change their minds.

For example: They say that welfare makes people not want to find a job. Then when you show them the majority of people on welfare are the WORKING poor....meaning they have a job. The right shrugs and says it again as if facts dont matter

It's because they get vastly more with a pathetic job when adding in a never ending welfare due toi having that bullshit job.

This is why I can't be a liberal, you hate science, you hate logic, you hate reality.

Take any animal, feed it, shelter it... It gets lazy, it becomes "dependent." Do you disagree with this statement? Do you think humans are not animals?

 

[bedowin62]

The fact that a person even has to ask this question - just shows the insanity of the left when it comes to economics.
30 years of glaring data pointing so clearly to 'yes' - doesn't matter. Some facility lounge wine sniffer writes an article - and *poof* - 30 years of data just disappears.

Can you point to any data indicating that reducing welfare makes people more likely to get a job?

If there are currently three candidates right now for every job opening, what makes you think a welfare candidate would get that job?

No, this is all about gut feelings with them. No facts or data will change their minds.

For example: They say that welfare makes people not want to find a job. Then when you show them the majority of people on welfare are the WORKING poor....meaning they have a job. The right shrugs and says it again as if facts dont matter

you are an idiot; pure and simple; if the majority on welfare are working; then according to you one can work and be on welfare; how in the fuck is that fair to people who work and dont get welfare?
and they apparently arent working enough to pass a line that makes them ineligible to collect welfare; which makes the case for the other side you idiot. you think people are too stupid to do some simple math; and keep their hours just under what would end the flow of goodies
in your smug arrogant attempt to accuse others of not thinking you revealed you dont