Funds $5 | Needed $120
Like the community? Enjoy reading manga?
Then click on the small donation banner! Thx!

5%

Author Topic: The Federal Government should mandate that all states require job training . . .  (Read 4216 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline kalgorin

  • J-Starter
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Renommée: 0
    • View Profile
Back during the great depression the united states instituted the works progress administration to give jobs to the unemployed that desired to work.  This program was at least partially responsible for allowing america to weather the depression.  That aside, there is definite danger in taking away or limiting systems that when maintained reduce the pressures of poverty and thereby reduce the incidence of crime. 

What is foolish is not the welfare system, but the labour code that places the minimum wage for any full time job as lower than the welfare rate which is calculated as a minimal standard of living. 

To suggest that the welfare system is wasteful or over endulgent is indicative of a woeful lack of understanding of your own tax codes and the way social welfare is calculated - when you hear that social welfare accounts for 27 percent of GDP, that number is not only welfare programs but also encompasses tax breaks,not only for the poor but also the middle class.

Offline Kandieren

  • J-Starter
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Renommée: 0
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Having people do community service to boost economy moral is a good idea. But it's a matter of getting those people on welfare to get up off their butts and actually do something. They know that they are going to be getting that check, so they'll just sit back down and eat some more take-away. If only we could get those people to do something. It's a great idea. Wish we could enforce it.

Offline Avari

  • J-Starter
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Renommée: 0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile

I apologise if this is of topic but wouldn't one way to solve the problem with welfare actually paying more than minimum wage employment simply be to raise the minimum wage?

While I'm not american (or even an native english speaker for that matter, so bear with me) my understanding is that welfare is calculated to be the minimum income needed to feed, clothe and house yourself with the most basic stuff available. To have a full time job where you earn less than that seems kind of strange to me, especially since when you're surviving on a bare minimum or less makes it very hard to "pull yourself up" since you simply don't have capital to invest in say education or time for job training, since missing that one paycheck might mean losing your house etc. Welfare should be there to make it easier to rebound on the social safety net, back up to full employment, not get you stuck under it unable to get up again.

I have been told that a low minimum wage creates new jobs (and leaving the discussion wether that is true or not for another time) but when you have to work two jobs, one fulltime and one part time to make ends meet isn't that just playing with numbers so that whoever feels responsible can say that they created so and so many jobs.
And while there certainly are some social mobility upwards, there are always succes stories like someone going from poor to super rich and all that, but the ongoing trend is that the poorer generaly get poorer and the richer get richer since the 90's, although those numbers are from 2008 (but I doubt the crash helped).

But then again I'm from sweden and I'm told we're all socialists over here.


Offline yuzen003

  • J-Starter
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Renommée: 0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
I think that, right there, is the problem with America's welfare and unemployment rather than people abusing the system or not having skills and what not.  It's the lack of social mobility in our nation nowadays, it's the lack of not being able to make it anymore at all the jobs that used to pay for not a lavish lifestyle but at least an acceptable one.  At one point in time, being a waitress, while not glamorous, used to at least pay the bills.  Nowadays, it's just considered that crap job you have while being told that you should go find a "real job."

I would have to disagree with part of this, people actually are able to get out of poverty all the time so there is social mobility. The problem is people fall into poverty just as frequently or relapse into poverty. There should be a support system to help people if life situations such as getting laid off, an accident, illness, etc but if they are paid when they are not working or even making an attempt to improve themselves it has a counter productive effect. Obviously it encourages people not to work when people need to quit working in order to receive welfare or receive less welfare if they receive a minimum wage job. The system needs to be reformed to encourage people to find work and help them lift themselves out of poverty without penalizing them when they take steps in that direction.

Offline dragonspell

  • I ♥ Winchester Boys!
  • jCafe Nobility
  • God of Water
  • *****
  • Posts: 16.089
  • Renommée: 515
  • And you know what? We kind of liked it.
    • View Profile
you should have been able to find one even if it is working at like McDonald's or something like that.

A McJob is no job at all.  Have you heard of "underemployment"?  Some people collect welfare not just because they cannot find a job but because they cannot find a job that they can live on.  They need a job that pays for rent and food and you're just not going to find that working for minimum wage.  So they suck up their pride and go on welfare.  Only welfare has a bunch of red tape, just like any other federal program (due to people who don't understand it trying to legislate it).  There was one case where a woman actually HAD a job, but just didn't make enough to pay rent and feed and clothe her daughter (she was a single parent).  She applied for welfare after much deliberation, just looking for a little extra to help pay the bills while she kept looking for a better job.  Thing was?  The Welfare Office told her that in order to qualify for welfare, she'd have to QUIT her job.  How is that for making sense?


Most complaints about no jobs are for high pay salary work, and sometimes in order to get those jobs, you have to work at a crappy place first.

That's if you can get a crappy entry-level job at a place that can offer promotions to better jobs.  Where can you go if you work on the grill line at McDonald's?  There's not exactly much.  Oh, sure, one day, if you scrape by and get lucky, maybe even go back and finish up that degree, you can become manager.  It's not much better.  You'll never go higher.  You'll never make General Manager or District Manager because those people are not ones who started by working the grill line.  They were hired-in specifically to be Managers.  They have degrees.

There's a glass panel between the blue collar jobs (say, the grill line cooks), and the white collars (the salaried District Managers).

if you are working multiple minimum wage jobs then finding the time for community service or job training could be a burden they cannot afford.

Exactly.  A lot of people on welfare HAVE training, they just can't find a job in their field.

Plus, you have programs like the one in Georgia I believe it is that has the unemployed work for FREE for businesses in order to be "trained" but yet, after the month of their training period is up, when the businesses are supposed to hire the unemployed people that have been working for them for free, many DO NOT.  They simply go out and get more unemployed people to work for them for free again.

I think that, right there, is the problem with America's welfare and unemployment rather than people abusing the system or not having skills and what not.  It's the lack of social mobility in our nation nowadays, it's the lack of not being able to make it anymore at all the jobs that used to pay for not a lavish lifestyle but at least an acceptable one.  At one point in time, being a waitress, while not glamorous, used to at least pay the bills.  Nowadays, it's just considered that crap job you have while being told that you should go find a "real job."

I'm not against welfare recipients receiving training but I think that that should rather be an option rather than a mandate.  It would not be a one-size fits all solution.

Offline yuzen003

  • J-Starter
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Renommée: 0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Being on welfare doesn't necessarily mean you are unemployed, and if you are working multiple minimum wage jobs then finding the time for community service or job training could be a burden they cannot afford. If you are working but are unable to sustain yourself or your family without additional government aid then how would you manage to survive if you are forced to reduce your working hours for training that may not provide any immediate monetary benefit?

A better idea would probably instituting such a program for unemployment recipients as they are receiving money while they are not working.

Offline meyan3

  • J-Starter
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Renommée: 0
    • View Profile
These ideas are all flawed. You assume that because people are on welfare they lack the ability to work, yet welfare is often the product of lacking employment. Also the idea that extended welfare benefits provide no incentive to find work is absurd. When you are on welfare you are on a fixed income ... that's all you get. There is no means of social mobility. Most people want to make more of themselves just as I assume you have ambitions in your life as well. Just because people are poor does not mean they lack ambition, or that have no pride in bettering their lives. Sure, there are those who abuse the system, but you can't punish the majority of poor people who have the will to work but are experiencing hardship. Limiting welfare is narrowing the social safety net, and is ultimately a poor investment on the part of the government.

Do not make assumptions of the poor based on anecdotes.

Offline blazing_falcon

  • J-Starter
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Renommée: 0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
I've always thought that the best way to handle any welfare problems is to make it impossible to stay on welfare indefinitely.  According to US Government Spending, welfare is one of the highest costs by the US government beaten only by pensions, healthcare, and defense.  To me, this is absurd.  I've never been on welfare or even really understand it fully, but from what I understand, welfare is available as long as one meets the requirements, whatever they are.  And since that's the case, people have no real incentive to find a job if they can survive on welfare.

I think that welfare should be available for 6 months at first and during the fourth month, one can apply for an extension of another 6 months.  However, one is limited to a maximum of four extensions, so 2 years on welfare, such that in that time if you are actively seeking a job, you should have been able to find one even if it is working at like McDonald's or something like that.  If you don't find a job, well screw you.  A government should help out its people, but only if those people help themselves.  Most complaints about no jobs are for high pay salary work, and sometimes in order to get those jobs, you have to work at a crappy place first. Maybe my assumptions are wrong, but that's a system that I feel could help out a lot in lowering government spending on welfare.

Your idea about giving job training sounds like a great idea to me.  A mandated job training system would definitely be a great idea as it would increase the likelihood that people would be able to get a stable, sustainable job.  However, I feel like the community service might be a little much since people should be job searching as their job while on welfare.  If they are doing community service, it will take away from the time that they can be job searching, although a little bit of community service a few evenings a week in order to continue receiving checks in the mail could work.  The only real issue with all of this is that it would require a lot of new infrastructure to maintain it.

Offline respecttheinternet

  • J-Starter
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Renommée: 1
    • View Profile
The Federal Government should require that all welfare recipients perform community service and optionally receive job training.

My Thoughts:
A great deal of our government's debt is due to our flagging economy, and because of our flagging economy, so many people have had to apply for welfare which drains the economy. So, we should at least get some work out of them. Right now littering and trash is a huge problem for society, along with vandalism and many other problems (I don't know all of the activities that can be performed since I'm not in such a group that does so).

It's essentially something similar to what Roosevelt did during the Great Depression, but because of all of our safe guards essentially only a part of the population is going through a sort of "Depression". Doing some community work would help strengthen people's confidence in their selves, give them skills outside of their field, promote better working habits, and make them more productive members of society.

Any thoughts on the idea? There was a recent debate on the topic and I just wanted to see if anyone else had any good thoughts on the matter.

 Also about the title, I thought about the idea and requiring job training is really just a unreasonable idea so I made it optional because there are some states that could use it.