Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ihnp4!qantel!ptsfa!gilbbs!mc68020
From: mc68020@gilbbs.UUCP (Thomas J Keller)
Newsgroups: net.misc
Subject: Re: Poor People
Message-ID: <1033@gilbbs.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 24-Sep-86 16:01:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: gilbbs.1033
Posted: Wed Sep 24 16:01:16 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 29-Sep-86 04:40:14 EDT
References: <910@gilbbs.UUCP> <975@hou2g.UUCP>
Organization: Gil's Place, Santa Rosa CA
Lines: 52
Summary: great idea

In article <975@hou2g.UUCP>, scott@hou2g.UUCP (Ma-Ma-Ma-Max Ma-Ma-Max Headroom) writes:
> If most of the "new jobs" are minimum wage jobs, simply pay out
> in welfare only the difference between what is being paid now, 
> and what could be earned at minimum wage.  That way, it forces
> people who simply do not WANT to work to get a job to feed their
> family.

  Great idea, Scott.  Only two problems:

  1)  there *USED* to be such a program.  The Reagan Adminstration dismantled
      it within months of taking office, on the grounds that it would save
      money.  In point of fact, sufficiently large numbers of recipients,
      realizing they couldn't live on their part-time minimum wage jobs
      quit or got themselves fired, and went back to receiving full welfare
      benefits, thus costing the government much *MORE* money.

   2) the fact is that in many places (California is one) one can actually
      survive (however meagerly) on welfare.  One often cannot survive on
      a minimum wage salary.  One reason for this is that while the actual
      cash income is approximately the same, under welfare (at least in Ca)
      one receives *SOME* medical benefits.  In a minimum wage job, one does
      not.

    
   On a slightly different topic, I keep seeing 'libertarians' talking about
those "irresponsible" welfare recipients who have large families.  What these
people fail to realize (deliberately, I suspect) is that today, there are many
largish families on welfare that were large when the parents were earning,
but due to massive layoffs in many industries, these families no longer have
an independent income.

   Now, your typical 'libertarian' will argue that these folks should accept
*ANY* job that comes along, regardless of pay scale.  The fact that these
families simply *CANNOT* survive at the pay scales of *MOST* available jobs
doesn't even occur to 'libertarians'.  And of course, these highly knowledgable
'libertarians' also fail to realize that fast food outfits seldom hire full 
time employees.  Yet, the 'libertarians' are extremely fond of suggesting that 
these folks should take fast food jobs rather than accept welfare.

   Face it.  "Libertarian" is a synonym for "cynical, self-righteous, self-
   satisfied, self-centered greedy bastard".



-- 

Disclaimer:  Disclaimer?  DISCLAIMER!? I don't need no stinking DISCLAIMER!!!

tom keller					"She's alive, ALIVE!"
{ihnp4, dual}!ptsfa!gilbbs!mc68020

(* we may not be big, but we're small! *)