Why do poor communities exist in America?

[WinterBorn]

When you allege everyone will want unemployment compensation instead of a market friendly wage from some labor they may actually enjoy.

When did I say that everyone will want unemployment? Here is a clue: I didn't.

Even when I worked up the numbers for what it would cost to follow your scheme, I said 5% of the adult population.

 

[danielpalos]

Not once have I said that anyone should be forced to work. Not once.

However, if you want someone to pay you their hard earned money, you should be providing something in return. I am fine with you not working, as long as you are fine with not being paid.

I agree that no employer should have to pay unemployment compensation as they do now. It is a State issue and should be handled by the State along with revenue generation for that policy.

 

[danielpalos]

When did I say that everyone will want unemployment? Here is a clue: I didn't.

Even when I worked up the numbers for what it would cost to follow your scheme, I said 5% of the adult population.

Thanks. Then there should be no problem since anyone who is "greedy enough" under Capitalism won't apply for unemployment compensation if they can make more in the private sector. See how market friendly that public policy would be.

 

[WinterBorn]

I agree that no employer should have to pay unemployment compensation as they do now. It is a State issue and should be handled by the State along with revenue generation for that policy.

I changed my mind. Everyone gets to collect unemployment for 26 weeks. Your last employer will be the one to pay for it out of their unemployment insurance. It is only 26 weeks. The first set will have some people who haven't worked in a while. But that way there will be no tax burden, and it will even out as those who complete the 26 weeks start working to get to their next 26 weeks of money for nothing.

 

[WinterBorn]

Thanks. Then there should be no problem since anyone who is "greedy enough" under Capitalism won't apply for unemployment compensation if they can make more in the private sector. See how market friendly that public policy would be.

Why wouldn't they do both? You insist there be no means testing. So you will take the people's word for it that they are not working, right?

 

[danielpalos]

I changed my mind. Everyone gets to collect unemployment for 26 weeks. Your last employer will be the one to pay for it out of their unemployment insurance. It is only 26 weeks. The first set will have some people who haven't worked in a while. But that way there will be no tax burden, and it will even out as those who complete the 26 weeks start working to get to their next 26 weeks of money for nothing.

Thanks for your opinion. How does that solve simple poverty on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

 

[danielpalos]

Why wouldn't they do both? You insist there be no means testing. So you will take the people's word for it that they are not working, right?

Reporting income seems like a simple administrative mechanism to help solve that problem. Getting the IRS and State equivalents seems to make a difference. They could be taxed at a higher rate for making more than the unemployment compensation rate and collecting unemployment compensation.

 

[WinterBorn]

Thanks for your opinion. How does that solve simple poverty on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

UC was never meant to solve simple poverty. It was meant to help workers.

 

[WinterBorn]

Reporting income seems like a simple administrative mechanism to help solve that problem. Getting the IRS and State equivalents seems to make a difference. They could be taxed at a higher rate for making more than the unemployment compensation rate and collecting unemployment compensation.

Or they could work for cash under the table and collect unemployment compensation.

 

[danielpalos]

UC was never meant to solve simple poverty. It was meant to help workers.

That is the problem, do you think? There is no provision for excuses in our federal doctrine. Our welfare clause is General and must provide for any given dilemma.

 

[danielpalos]

Or they could work for cash under the table and collect unemployment compensation.

Only illegals do that.

 

[WinterBorn]

That is the problem, do you think? There is no provision for excuses in our federal doctrine. Our welfare clause is General and must provide for any given dilemma.

No, I do not think that is the problem. I think trying to make UC fit where it shouldn't, and trying to make it solve problems it was never meant to address is the problem.

Unemployment Compensation is to provide temporary help to workers who are out of work.

If you want long term solutions to poverty, there are already programs that address that. There is no need to duplicate efforts and muddy the waters.

 

[WinterBorn]

Only illegals do that.

Absolutely wrong. Plenty of American citizens do that, for a variety of reasons.

 

[danielpalos]

No, I do not think that is the problem. I think trying to make UC fit where it shouldn't, and trying to make it solve problems it was never meant to address is the problem.

Unemployment Compensation is to provide temporary help to workers who are out of work.

If you want long term solutions to poverty, there are already programs that address that. There is no need to duplicate efforts and muddy the waters.

That is simply wrong. That line of reasoning is merely expensive mismanagement that only increases our tax burden. Unemployment compensation has already been observed with a multiplier of two.

Means-tested welfare is the third most expensive government function, ranking below Social Security and Medicare but above spending on national defense.

Understanding the Hidden $1.1 Trillion Welfare System and How to Reform It

Since the beginning of the War on Poverty, government has spent vast sums on welfare or aid to the poor, but the aggregate cost of this assistance is largely unknown because the spending is fragmented into myriad programs.

www.heritage.org

 

[WinterBorn]

That is simply wrong. That line of reasoning is merely expensive mismanagement that only increases our tax burden. Unemployment compensation has already been observed with a multiplier of two.

Means-tested welfare is the third most expensive government function, ranking below Social Security and Medicare but above spending on national defense.

Understanding the Hidden $1.1 Trillion Welfare System and How to Reform It

Since the beginning of the War on Poverty, government has spent vast sums on welfare or aid to the poor, but the aggregate cost of this assistance is largely unknown because the spending is fragmented into myriad programs.

www.heritage.org

In its current form. But you want to change the method of funding, who is eligible, how long they can draw a check, and how much they can draw.

Of course UC looks better as far as increasing tax revenue. It doesn't start as tax dollars handed out for nothing.

Also, according to you link, the means tested welfare is strictly for the poorer socio-economic groups, and not all citizens. It is designed to weed out those who can live without it. In that way it is superior to your altered UC because it is focused solely on the poor. This makes it a better option for solving simple poverty.

And really, the use of the multiplier for social welfare programs is a bogus line of reasoning. That really doesn't matter as much as limiting fraud and focusing on the actual poor who need the welfare to survive.

 

[danielpalos]

In its current form. But you want to change the method of funding, who is eligible, how long they can draw a check, and how much they can draw.

This is the point:

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

 

[WinterBorn]

Also, comparing the cost of welfare to unemployment compensation is comparing apples to oranges.

Other than the disaster that the covid-19 pandemic caused, unemployment compensation has rarely been above 6% to 9%. And that is always temporary (26 weeks average)

The lowest numbers I found for Americans collecting welfare programs was 21.3% of the population. And since UC does not come from tax money of course means tested welfare is a much bigger expense.

And even those on welfare tend to not use it as their source of income for life.

from: How Long Do People Stay On Public Benefits?
"Of the one-in-five Americans who participated in a program like Medicaid or food stamps from 2009 through 2012, the Census Bureau reported this week, 56 percent stopped participating within 36 months, while 43 percent lingered between three and four years. Nearly one-third quit receiving benefits within one year. "

 

[danielpalos]

Also, comparing the cost of welfare to unemployment compensation is comparing apples to oranges.

Other than the disaster that the covid-19 pandemic caused, unemployment compensation has rarely been above 6% to 9%. And that is always temporary (26 weeks average)

The lowest numbers I found for Americans collecting welfare programs was 21.3% of the population. And since UC does not come from tax money of course means tested welfare is a much bigger expense.

And even those on welfare tend to not use it as their source of income for life.

from: How Long Do People Stay On Public Benefits?
"Of the one-in-five Americans who participated in a program like Medicaid or food stamps from 2009 through 2012, the Census Bureau reported this week, 56 percent stopped participating within 36 months, while 43 percent lingered between three and four years. Nearly one-third quit receiving benefits within one year. "

Means nothing when we have an actual homeless problem.

Equal protection of the laws is guaranteed in our several Constitutions.

 

[WinterBorn]

This is the point:

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

And they are entitled to all the privileges. But that does not mean that there cannot be qualifications and basic requirements.

Also, you are extending the Privileges & Immunities Clause to areas it does not belong.

from: Privileges and Immunities Clause
"The Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV, Section 2 of the Constitution states that "the citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states." This clause protects fundamental rights of individual citizens and restrains state efforts to discriminate against out-of-state citizens. However, the Privileges and Immunities Clause extends not to all commercial activity, but only to fundamental rights."

That is quoted from the Cornell Law School legal information pages.

 

[WinterBorn]

Means nothing when we have an actual homeless problem.

Equal protection of the laws is guaranteed in our several Constitutions.

Yes, there are guarantees of equal protection of basic rights. That does not include all areas of commerce.