I don't know what 86% of 75% equals in terms of 100% but I'm confident enough in how numbers work to know it means majority of who you're talking about are the people you said you don't expect to work.
Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk
If there are 1,000,000 people in poverty, and 75% are non-workers (750,000) and 86% of that group are people we dont expect to work (645,000), that's still 355,000 people who are in their financial situation for reasons they can potentially control.
Look at Mr. Metric system over here and his fancy math.
This discussion has come up time and time again here. Systems will never function at 100% efficiency. There will always be people who get caught up in a program (good or bad) that don't belong in that situation. It is impossible to be perfect. Better to help a huge group of people knowing that there is a small percentage that is gaming the system than not help anyone at all. Same philosophy that we use to justify having laws. We know there are going to be people who don't follow the laws and listen to them but better to have them in place and dissuade the larger group of people who will listen than not have them at all.
Also poverty has a strong correlation with crime rates. It's a net benefit to the state if you allocate money toward the root cause/preventive measure (reducing poverty) as opposed to the symptom (crime)
And these welfare checks go back into the economy etc etc Lmao
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
I still maintain that the biggest expenditure for anybody low income, is rent/housing.
Get that under control, and you open a lot of income to be used elsewhere.
You aren't wrong, and a growing number of towns and cities are doing these apartment district things that suck up housing land, cost too much in rent, and lock you into increases in the name of market "competition". While true that homeowners don't have it easier because of taxes I don't believe renting is cheaper in the long run.
All these business and real estate companies see middle to low income people are getting help, so they are increasing the prices on everything.
If the estimates are to be believed my 350k house I bought last November is now 450k+. Housing is outrageous basically everywhere and it keeps getting worse. I would happppppily have my home value go down if it meant the market as a whole were fixed so most of my friends could actually afford a house vs an apartment.
Also my home once I finally got it is still essentially cheaper than renting here (Austin) as the rent increases year over year have gotten insane for anything over like 1200 sqft.
i want to buy a house kinda but looks like gonna have to wait on the crash
To be fair, you try to find self sufficiency when your rent is 8-1200 dollars (on the low end, california it's double unless you live in some shit hole like fresno) and working 3 full time jobs at 8-12 an hour that won't even give you a set schedule or a full 40 hours a week and see how easy it is to pull yourself up from the bootstraps like that.
Hell, Astylla and I bring home a little over 7k a month combined, and even in a dumpster fire of a apartment our rent is still about 35% of our total take home pay.
There is some bad math going on here, but it kind of doesn't matter. Everyone can agree that it sucks to be in poverty in the US right now, so anyone opting in to that is crazy. There, now they are 100% DQ'd from working.