It's because millions of them are making more money from unemployment and welfare than they could by working. The New York Post reports:
Did you know that families earning half a million dollars a year can receive ObamaCare subsidies? Or that in some states, unemployment insurance benefits can be equivalent to a job with annual pay of $100,000?
It’s shocking but true, and it might explain why so many businesses can’t get workers back on the job almost three years after COVID-19 hit these shores. Today there are still at least 3 million fewer Americans working than there were in 2019.
. . .
Many programs, like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (a k a food stamps), are means tested, so that only low-income people qualify for them. But other handouts are not — including unemployment insurance and ObamaCare subsidies.
The value of these benefits can be staggering — much higher, in fact, than many blue-collar professions.
- In 24 states, unemployment benefits and ObamaCare subsidies for a family of four with no one working are the annualized equivalent of at least the national median household.
- A family making almost a quarter of a million dollars annually still qualifies for ObamaCare subsidies in every state.
- In a dozen states, the value of unemployment benefits and ObamaCare subsidies exceeds the salary and benefits of the average teacher, construction worker, electrician, firefighter, truck driver, machinist or retail associate.
- In New Jersey, a family of four can receive benefits equal to an annualized earned income of $108,000 with no one working.
- In Connecticut and New Jersey, a family earning $300,000 a year can receive ObamaCare subsidies.
- New Jersey is a state where a family can earn the equivalent of $100,000 a year if both parents are collecting unemployment benefits and ObamaCare subsidies for health care. In Connecticut the benefits can reach $80,000.
There's more at the link, including a list of all 50 states and the unemployment benefits available in each one.
So, if you wanted to know how the Federal government can be running a deficit of one-and-a-half trillion dollars every year . . . there it is. A lot of that money is subsidizing those who aren't working, some of whom doubtless deserve the assistance, but many others of whom simply couldn't be bothered to work rather than sponge off the taxpayers of this country.
That's why there are between four and six million Americans who were at work prior to 1920, but who are "no longer in the labor force". Many of them no longer need to be in the labor force, because you and I and our taxes are subsidizing their lives of leisure.
Will the Biden administration do anything to lessen this burden on US taxpayers? Like hell they will! Every freeloader on benefits is a likely voter for them, and they know it.
Peter
16 comments:
Hope the 1920 was really 2020 and the fingers misfired :-)
Not sure about the rest but I hit 67 this year and decided to pitch it. Not sure how it will all work out but I think I have earned it.
Should be "prior to 2020," not 1920.
The article is as you read it. Errors and/or omissions are the authors' responsibility.
Fundamentally going to work is no longer a way to improve your life or that of your family. Greed is the name of the corporate game and no one wants to acknowledge that the price of labor has stayed the same, but unacknowledged inflation makes it look like munificent pay when in fact people just watch their bills climb faster than their pay. And the worker bees know this, they may not always be able to articulate it, but they know going to work is not a path to making their lives better. You get more of what you incentivize.
The other facet is how crappy jobs have become. Many employers utilize part time jobs with no health care benefits and no real way to afford them. There is little to no training so frustrated customers take it out on the employees. The managers have no training in management or leadership. Most low level workers have little hope of advancement where they are at. There is little to no reward for doing a job well or even exemplary.
And to add insult to injury, inflation is caused by unrestrained government printing in order to hand out money to people who do live in states where they can take advantage of sizable benefits.
If I remember correctly, most other countries include public benefits in the calculations of whether one is 'poor' or not, and for some reason the US doesn't do that.
It would be straightforward to fix that: make any benefit provided to an individual, funded at taxpayer expense, reportable to the IRS as income. Isn't a problem if the total net benefit doesn't take you over the standard deduction, plus additional qualifying deductions. Private charity benefits shouldn't be taxed or reported; there's a bottom to that bucket, and they don't need the extra hassle, but if they are partly funded through public grants, then they should report the percentage of that benefit that comes from taxes.
You can't get any of that if you are over 60 and a white male drawing an enlisted military retirement.
I think most of these articles overlook the number of people just working for cash.
Especially tradesmen.
Between the high rate of taxes AND where we see our taxes going, why would anyone want a real job in these times?
If you have just tad of hustle, you can do quite well working for folks for cash.
So a very generous Basic Living Stipend, disguised as a bunch of other things.
I'd been hearing rumors of people dropping out and living high on the hog on the dole, but was vaguely under the impression that this depended on programs that either had expired or didn't apply in this area. Seems it's UBIquitous.
I'm pretty sure I don't qualify for any of that stuff. Maybe if I identified as undocumented?
"That's why there are between four and six million Americans who were at work prior to 1920, but who are "no longer in the labor force". "
But Peter, you are the author.
I'd be willing to bet there aren't four to six million living Americans who were at work prior to 1920 but who are no longer in the labor force.
:-)
Hey Peter;
Also something to keep in mind, a lot of those places mentioned are in the northeast where the "standard" of living or cost of living is a lot higher than us in the south. I do agree that they need to stop subsidizing all the bennies, I remember a stat from the University of Mississippi right before Covid, that a single mom with 2 kids get more in benefits than a family working at $60,000 a year then you wonder why we have such a grifter class and the huge debt we have. Since Covid they increased the bennies much more so it is hard to entice people to work. Way back in the day, it was a matter of pride to "work for your keep", not so much now, its how much you can scam out of the system.
I didn't notice any information in the article (or in the comment section) that if you weren't working, you had more time to visit several welfare offices where you could be registered under different names and addresses.
And please don't say it isn't true or it can't be done.
tsquared is on point. I tell people that all the time. "I'm an old white veteran. Nobody is going to give me shit" I usually just get a blank stare for few seconds before they change the subject
I'm sure some of what is said here is true, but to collect the amounts you describe requires a level of dishonesty and fraud. (Note boron's comment above. Charlie may have it right that there is a huge underground cash economy that isn't counted. Which is why governments like the whole CBDC approach.) Are that many people dishonest?
Some of these "benefits" are not all that easy to collect. If you've ever been on unemployment (which theoretically is something your employer pays for in lieu of paying you a higher salary, sort of an insurance policy) it can be a real pain to qualify for. I was on it for a few months, and I had to submit weekly proof that I was actively looking for work. Which in my field, was a real pain since there were not many openings at that time. And taking something outside that field would have been damaging to my future professional prospects. About a third of the weeks they denied the benefit. I refused to apply for anything else at that time, and finally managed to find independent contract work.
I don't know how people who don't have a job survive for very long. As a society, we sure do spend a lot of money on social services, but frankly I think a major chunk of that goes to supporting the agencies and their employees, not the people they are supposed to be helping. Social services are primarily QE for government and job security for bureaucrats.
Mind your own business said...
Are that many people dishonest?
Yes, that many truly are dishonest.
I am hoping you meant the ones double dipping on benefits, not the participants in the underground economy. I have felt strongly that avoiding taxes, legally or not, is part of being an American. When we have no real say in where our taxes go, how can it be dishonest?
When we see where our tax money is going I feel it is not just reasonable to pay as little as possible, but a moral imperative not to participate.
I admit to being somewhat conflicted about the underground economy. It feels a little bit like aRObin Hood scenario, except they are only keeping what they steal.
" ... avoiding taxes, legally or not, is part of being an American"
Uh, no. No matter how sympathetic, nobody gets let off that easily. Dishonest is dishonest. A bank robber may need the money for his kid's operation, but that doesn't lessen the crime. He's still stealing from others.
I may have empathy, but that doesn't mean I excuse the act. Love the sinner, hate the sin. Those people are just not pulling their weight. Shirkers.
And yes, I know that we have virtually no control over our tax money (or any of the money they are borrowing to put us all in debt.) That doesn't make tax fraud honest. Rationalize it all you want if it helps you sleep at night, but those people don't deserve the rights of citizenship.
I sleep just fine and I hope you do the same despite the chains.
Post a Comment