dieseldiva
Veteran Expediter
Mark Levin was talking about this a short while ago......fascinating stats.....
Why Work???
- Thread starter dieseldiva
- Start date
witness23
Veteran Expediter
Your link took me to Mark Levin's website. I then searched for Wyatt Emmerich of the Cleveland Current after reading the story. That took me to a page with a list of blogs and message boards with Sean Hannity's forum listed first. I searched Wyatt Emmerich, nothing. I searched Wyatt Emmerich entitlement, nothing, I searched Wyatt Emmerich at Mississippis Cleveland Current, not one link to Wyatt Emmerich's story that was mentioned in Levins page, Hannity's forum and referenced by Tyler Durden. Why should I or anyone else believe these numbers? Where did these numbers come from? Who is Wyatt Emmerich? And who is Tyler Durden?
If anyone could provide a link to Emmerich's story, that would be great.
If anyone could provide a link to Emmerich's story, that would be great.
Looks like Mr. Emerich is the publisher of Northsidesun and he published an article in there a month ago:
northsidesun - With welfare it makes sense to work less
I don't see where that chart is referenced anywhere, but if you look up the government initiatives for all those things, I'll bet it's not a stretch.
dieseldiva
Veteran Expediter
Read the story and you'll see where the numbers came from. I don't care what you believe, that wasn't my purpose for posting the link.....but I will say this, do you really think Mark Levin would air that on his show without researching it first?
In Entitlement America, The Head Of A Household Of Four Making Minimum Wage Has More Disposable Income Than A Family Making $60,000 A Year
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 11/21/2010 23:18 -0500
Federal Tax
Tonight's stunning financial piece de resistance comes from Wyatt Emerich of The Cleveland Current. In what is sure to inspire some serious ire among all those who once believed Ronald Reagan that it was the USSR that was the "Evil Empire", Emmerich analyzes disposable income and economic benefits among several key income classes and comes to the stunning (and verifiable) conclusion that "a one-parent family of three making $14,500 a year (minimum wage) has more disposable income than a family making $60,000 a year." And that excludes benefits from Supplemental Security Income disability checks. America is now a country which punishes those middle-class people who not only try to work hard, but avoid scamming the system. Not surprisingly, it is not only the richest and most audacious thieves that prosper - it is also the penny scammers at the very bottom of the economic ladder that rip off the middle class each and every day, courtesy of the world's most generous entitlement system. Perhaps if Reagan were alive today, he would wish to modify the object of his once legendary remark.
From Emmerich:
You can do as well working one week a month at minimum wage as you can working $60,000-a-year, full-time, high-stress job.
My chart tells the story. It is pretty much self-explanatory.
Stunning? Just do it yourself.
Almost all welfare programs have Web sites where you can call up "benefits calculators." Just plug in your income and family size and, presto, your benefits are automatically calculated.
The chart is quite revealing. A one-parent family of three making $14,500 a year (minimu wage) has more disposable income than a amily making $60,000 a year.
And if that wasn't enough, here is one that will blow your mind:
If the family provider works only one week a month at minimum wage, he or she makes 92 percent as much as a provider grossing $60,000 a year.
Ever wonder why Obama was so focused on health reform? It is so those who have no interest or ability in working, make as much as representatives of America's once exalted, and now merely endangered, middle class.
First of all, working one week a month, saves big-time on child care. But the real big-ticket item is Medicaid, which has minimal deductibles and copays. By working only one week a month at a minimum wage job, a provider is able to get total medical coverage for next to nothing.
Compare this to the family provider making $60,000 a year. A typical Mississippi family coverage would cost around $12,000, adding deductibles and copays adds an additional $4,500 or so to the bill. That's a huge hit.
There is a reason why a full time worker may not be too excited to learn there is little to show for doing the "right thing."
The full-time $60,000-a-year job is going to be much more demanding than woring one week a month at minimu wage. Presumably, the low-income parent will have more energy to attend to the various stresses of managing a household.
It gets even scarier if one assumes a little dishonesty is throwin in the equation.
If the one-week-a-month worker maintains an unreported cash-only job on the side, the deal gets better than a regular $60,000-a-year job. In this scenario, you maintain a reportable, payroll deductible, low-income job for federal tax purposes. This allows you to easily establish your qualification for all these welfare programs. Then your black-market job gives you additional cash without interfering with your benefits. Some economists estimate there is one trillion in unreported income each year in the United States.
This really got me thinking. Just how much money could I get if I set out to deliberately scam the system? I soon realized that getting a low-paying minimum wage job would set the stage for far more welfare benefits than you could earn in a real job, if you were weilling to cheat. Even if you dodn't cheat, you could do almost as well working one week a month at minimum wage than busting a gut at a $60,000-a-year job.
Now where it gets plainly out of control is if one throws in Supplemental Security Income.
SSI pays $8,088 per year for each "disabled" family member. A person can be deemed "disabled" if thy are totally lacking in the cultural and educational skills needed to be employable in the workforce.
If you add $24,262 a year for three disability checks, the lowest paid welfare family would now have far more take-home income than the $60,000-a-year family.
Best of all: being on welfare does not judge you if you are stupid enough not to take drugs all day, every day to make some sense out of this Mephistophelian tragicomedy known as living in the USA:
Most private workplaces require drug testing, but there is no drug testing to get welfare checks.
Alas, on America's way to to communist welfare, it has long since surpassed such bastions of capitalism as China:
The welfare system in communist China is far stringier. Those people have to work to eat.
We have been writing for over a year, how the very top of America's social order steals from the middle class each and every day. Now we finally know that the very bottom of the entitlement food chain also makes out like a bandit compared to that idiot American who actually works and pays their taxes. One can only also hope that in addition to seeing their disposable income be eaten away by a kleptocratic entitlement state, that the disappearing middle class is also selling off its weaponry. Because if it isn't, and if it finally decides it has had enough, the outcome will not be surprising at all: it will be the same old that has occurred in virtually every revolution in the history of the world to date.
h/t Nolsgrad
4.083335
Umm..those benefits pale as compared to the Canadian system..and yet Canada thrives and is economically viable...
What you guys seem to see is a destruction of a country...I think IMO what you are really thinking is the destruction of American ideology more so...
Yous basis of improving a country based on the individual effort rather then the collective effort....Denmark, Sweden all the collective..heck they even have minimum income standards...
What you guys seem to see is a destruction of a country...I think IMO what you are really thinking is the destruction of American ideology more so...
Yous basis of improving a country based on the individual effort rather then the collective effort....Denmark, Sweden all the collective..heck they even have minimum income standards...
dieseldiva
Veteran Expediter
Hubs and I have talked a lot about this so-called "collective" effort. We've both worked with dead beats that won't carry their weight and expected us to do their work for them and sadly, management turned their backs to it. This does nothing but create resentment.... a lot like the class warfare that's being shoved down our throats by the current administration.
I wasn't born "collectively"....unlike the current potus, I wasn't saved "collectively"....and I sure as heck won't die "collectively"....why would I want to live in these United States that I LOVE, collectively....I can go anywhere in the world and do that.....it's called American Exceptionalism and I'd like to see that remain for my children and grandchildren!
Agreed DD..BUT it appears there are more Americans then ever leaning towards the collective...or thought they did till some seen what it is like and swung back to the roots of American ideology...results of the last election..
dieseldiva
Veteran Expediter
If you tell a lie often enough, you begin to believe that it's true. (media) If you give a man a fish every day, soon he begins think that your fish are his. (far-left) Just two of the forces in this country that have been working against the American Dream for decades. I don't know how we as a people have allowed it to come this far but hopefully we're awake now and indeed can swing it back, as you say.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
See I would think no one caught the obvious mistake, including child care costs as something equal to taxes? If they are going to try to justify the costs of running the need to supplement every day things, they need to also include transportation, clothing, housing and any number of normal costs.
Yeah but OVM, Sweden and Denmark also count on the individual to put something more into the system by participating as a member of a community. Canada and the US and I think the UK too, don't require anything close to a participation from the individual directly.
I know of a number of families, four of which we have been helping out, who are receiving welfare assistance. They all view it as a temporary thing, something that is degrading but needed. The four we are helping have very harsh situations and they all know one another. A couple months ago they were going to get together, rent a house and pool their money together in order to save it, save the government money on food costs and other things by growing food and be able to get jobs eventually. The welfare agency case worker who handles two of the four families (a resource that should be outsourced) found out about their move to do this and cut them off cold warning them never to consider it. So now they are fighting for just an appointment with this '*****' to get food stamps - hence the reason we are helping out more now than ever.
The point is that when some of these people want to be part of a community to help themselves, it is shot down by the bureaucrats of the system and it is the system that has not created this class of people but more importantly a class of government workers who will fight not to reduce their rolls in the system they feed off of.
Yeah but OVM, Sweden and Denmark also count on the individual to put something more into the system by participating as a member of a community. Canada and the US and I think the UK too, don't require anything close to a participation from the individual directly.
I know of a number of families, four of which we have been helping out, who are receiving welfare assistance. They all view it as a temporary thing, something that is degrading but needed. The four we are helping have very harsh situations and they all know one another. A couple months ago they were going to get together, rent a house and pool their money together in order to save it, save the government money on food costs and other things by growing food and be able to get jobs eventually. The welfare agency case worker who handles two of the four families (a resource that should be outsourced) found out about their move to do this and cut them off cold warning them never to consider it. So now they are fighting for just an appointment with this '*****' to get food stamps - hence the reason we are helping out more now than ever.
The point is that when some of these people want to be part of a community to help themselves, it is shot down by the bureaucrats of the system and it is the system that has not created this class of people but more importantly a class of government workers who will fight not to reduce their rolls in the system they feed off of.
DD...American Dream..is that the individual American Dream or the collectives views? Interesting...It came this far because obviously people allowed it to for some reason only known to them.....
On the evolutionary scale..Canada was fortunate to have watched the Americans mistakes..like ghettoization of the poor...never worked..created big slums and soaring crime..so they mix the low income and subsidized working class and things work better because the next door neighbour goes to work everyday and does not have a welfare worker snooping all the time
WE work because NEITHER of us have ever been infected with that FATAL disease known as "Entitleistis"!! You contract that disease by having your "Entitilment Gland" over stimulated by sick teachers, college proffesors AND government officials!!
....................................
greg334
Veteran Expediter
OK here is the thing I'm getting at.
Canada, like the US has been doing the same thing with their natives (aka first nation citizens) which is controlling the land which they live on and in many cases, actually owning the land they live on.
We, the two countries, have pretty much decided that they can not take care of themselves and need to be directed and controlled by the feds to ensure their survival. THIS IS parallel to what we are doing to those who are receiving welfare.
I never understood the system that many of the Natives lived under but I learned outside of the treaties we created a class of people who even though they surrendered and had to be controlled like they are. This has created the exact same situation 70 years prior that we did with the Great Society programs that actually failed to produce 7 years after their inception.
IF Canada has actually learned the lessons you speak of, than they, along with this country would allow the natives to chart their own course and remove most if not all controls imposed on them. NOT really cutting the aid but the control, allowing them the same privileges and ownership that we as citizens enjoy.
If we can not allow them to do that, then we are both doomed on any social progress that is needed to straighten up the issue of welfare and that fact that we have a sub-class of people who exist through what is actually looks like a form of slavery.
Like the four families I spoke of, they tried to improve their situation and like the Natives, it never comes down to the people or their needs but the need to create, maintain and exploit the system in order to maintain bureaucratic jobs for people who work at the behest of the public.
Canada, like the US has been doing the same thing with their natives (aka first nation citizens) which is controlling the land which they live on and in many cases, actually owning the land they live on.
We, the two countries, have pretty much decided that they can not take care of themselves and need to be directed and controlled by the feds to ensure their survival. THIS IS parallel to what we are doing to those who are receiving welfare.
I never understood the system that many of the Natives lived under but I learned outside of the treaties we created a class of people who even though they surrendered and had to be controlled like they are. This has created the exact same situation 70 years prior that we did with the Great Society programs that actually failed to produce 7 years after their inception.
IF Canada has actually learned the lessons you speak of, than they, along with this country would allow the natives to chart their own course and remove most if not all controls imposed on them. NOT really cutting the aid but the control, allowing them the same privileges and ownership that we as citizens enjoy.
If we can not allow them to do that, then we are both doomed on any social progress that is needed to straighten up the issue of welfare and that fact that we have a sub-class of people who exist through what is actually looks like a form of slavery.
Like the four families I spoke of, they tried to improve their situation and like the Natives, it never comes down to the people or their needs but the need to create, maintain and exploit the system in order to maintain bureaucratic jobs for people who work at the behest of the public.
$14,500.00 per year, $1.208.33 per month $302.08 per week.
I have no doubt I could feed, & clothe one adult & two children on $302,08 per week. The children may be short of video games or any other electric or battery powered games. They wouldn't be in a Doctors office for every cough and hang nail. They may not like the dinner fare, but they would pass a physical and wouldn't be FAT.
There are "Thrift stores" all over the place for clothes, discount stores for bread & occasional pastries.
Tons of parents & grandparents think the best thing they can do for a child is never say no.
When I was growing up there was an older brother, two family's with a total of 5 brothers older then myself. On the same deadend road. When the clothes weren't coming from a neighbor they were coming from the Thrift shop.
I moved from South Western Ct. to South central\western MO. Never in my life have I seen so many FAT people riding around stores in electric carts. No wonder there fat, there to lazy to walk.
I have no doubt I could feed, & clothe one adult & two children on $302,08 per week. The children may be short of video games or any other electric or battery powered games. They wouldn't be in a Doctors office for every cough and hang nail. They may not like the dinner fare, but they would pass a physical and wouldn't be FAT.
There are "Thrift stores" all over the place for clothes, discount stores for bread & occasional pastries.
Tons of parents & grandparents think the best thing they can do for a child is never say no.
When I was growing up there was an older brother, two family's with a total of 5 brothers older then myself. On the same deadend road. When the clothes weren't coming from a neighbor they were coming from the Thrift shop.
I moved from South Western Ct. to South central\western MO. Never in my life have I seen so many FAT people riding around stores in electric carts. No wonder there fat, there to lazy to walk.
greg334
Veteran Expediter
Exactly!
One of the families that we have been helping does it on a lot less. I think we totaled up the food last month that came out to $300 and that is with four kids.
You know that it doesn't take a lot of money to get food that you can make, like flour and eggs. The kids are not malnourished by any means, they eat healthier than most other kids but not fat.
Clothing, from adding up the costs, there was about $120 spent for the month and that was due to the need to buy new shoes for three of them.
One of the families that we have been helping does it on a lot less. I think we totaled up the food last month that came out to $300 and that is with four kids.
You know that it doesn't take a lot of money to get food that you can make, like flour and eggs. The kids are not malnourished by any means, they eat healthier than most other kids but not fat.
Clothing, from adding up the costs, there was about $120 spent for the month and that was due to the need to buy new shoes for three of them.
One of the things I really like about here, besides the room. Most Cafes-Diners bake every day. Cookies, pies, cakes, muffins. Heaven
Heaven
witness23
Veteran Expediter
With out the chart this means nothing. We can argue all day long if it "pays" to be on welfare or not. The story becomes opinion and nothing more. Since the chart is the focus and proof of the story and supposedly confirms what the author(s) allegations of Welfare Benefits are, and we cannot confirm if the chart is factual or the numbers are actually correct, there is nothing to talk about.
All this is, is an attempt to start an argumentative dialogue, which serves no purpose other than getting people that listen or watch their shows "riled up", to keep up their ratings.
Which makes all the sense in the world when you search Mr. Emmerich's name, Hannity and a bunch of blogs come up in your search, and why we haven't been able to source the chart.
Last edited: