Food stamps, medical cards, and guilt

[still_me]

Since the need is great lately for families to get assistance, I hear more and more people admit that they are ashamed or express that they wish they didn't have to.

If you ever had to apply, are applying, or are receiving help, do you feel this way?

If you never have had to ask for help, how do you feel about people that do?

[Shaunsmom]

Since the need is great lately for families to get assistance, I hear more and more people admit that they are ashamed or express that they wish they didn't have to.

If you ever had to apply, are applying, or are receiving help, do you feel this way?

If you never have had to ask for help, how do you feel about people that do?

The only assistance that I ever qualified for was WIC and that was only with our son.

Nowadays, I think many people might be applying for assistance when before they didn't. I think if you are eligible to apply and receive assistance, do so:)

If I was eligible to apply and receive services that I was able to afford previously, I think I would be a bit ashamed but hey, I wouldn't decline said services because I was too ashamed. Would I feel guilty? Heck no.

My step sister lives at home with her dad and my mom, who is not her mom. She has four kids and does receive over $500 per month for food stamps. I think it's sad that no one in their house knows how to buy quality food and stretch out their money each month. There's plenty of times when there is just enough food to scrape up somewhat of a meal for the kids so they're not hungry. Sorry, that bit was off topic...

[JustMoi]

I recently applied for food stamps. I no longer have minor children at home, so I don't qualify for the other stuff. My unemployment is our only income. I don't feel "guilty" but I AM pissed off that at my age I'm applying for food stamps when I thought I'd be much better off due to my education and employment history. But living where I do, NOBODY is safe. Nobody.

[Got2chilluns]

I recently applied for food stamps when I went on my maternity leave, and I actually got them. I tried after I had my son, but apparently I made too much money ( haha!). You have to recertify every 3 months, so I'm sure the amount will decrease, as I am now back at work.
I have always been able to get WIC with each pregnancy. My kids have Medicaid.

Do I feel guilt? No. I do wish that I didn't need these services, but I don't intend to use them forever. I would like to go back to school (again) to become a nurse, once my kids are in gradeschool. The way I see it, I am using these services the way they were intended. I was a part of the taxpaying workforce for 15 years before I qualified or even needed any of these things, therefore a portion of my wage went in to paying for these programs. Now that I need them, they are here for me, and I will use them. When I am able to not need them anymore, or I no longer qualify, whichever comes first, I wont.

[jessiehannan]

I feel guilty that I am unable to provide these services for my kids. When I had my kids I didn't plan on being in the situation that I am in know.
But I apply for what ever services that I need, and use them accordingly.

[JudyJudyJudy]

I'm so sorry that so many are struggling right now.

I recently applied for food stamps. I no longer have minor children at home, so I don't qualify for the other stuff. My unemployment is our only income. I don't feel "guilty" but I AM pissed off that at my age I'm applying for food stamps when I thought I'd be much better off due to my education and employment history. But living where I do, NOBODY is safe. Nobody.
While Michigan is the worst state you can be in right now, I'd be willing to say that nobody is safe anywhere right now in the US, except perhaps in North Dakota. Meanwhile, however, many continue to sit high and mighty assuming that they are untouchable.

[MrsKitty]

Different situation since I am in Canada and we aren't having the trouble you guys but I will answer anyways.

I am not getting public assistance (unless you count maternity leave as public assistance..I don't know if it is? Everyone gets it regardless of income) but I am getting help from my parents until my husband is finished university. When he is done we are on our own. If we were not getting help from them, we would have a choice to accept public assistance while my husband was in school, or have him just work but not go through school. We would choose him going to school. I would not feel guilty about this. We both paid taxes before he started school, and when he is finished school we will be back paying taxes into the same system. As long as one of us is working, we are paying money into that system. That system is there to help the people in our country get through tough times.

In the hypothetical situation of us getting public assistance during his schooling, he would finish school, get a job, and pay taxes back all over again.

He pretty much can't work through his first year, but then he can get a placement through the summer between year one and year two, and then is pretty much expected to be working in the industry part time for the rest of his schooling. But first year is about 8 hours of school a day followed by 3-4 hours of homework a day.

[JustMoi]

MrsKitty... maternity leave is a luxury here in the U.S. Employers do NOT have to give it, nor do they have to make it be paid.

[MrsKitty]

I know. I think it is horrible. We get a year paid mat leave. I wasn't sure if people would consider that public assistance, because it is something that every mother is entitled too regardless of income.

[pawprint]

We were on food stamps for a shirt stint when dh finished his degree. i never felt bad aout it, no. The two of us paid taxes for many years. We certainly got a heck of a lot less than we've paid in.

[Darcy]

I'm so sorry that so many are struggling right now.


While Michigan is the worst state you can be in right now, I'd be willing to say that nobody is safe anywhere right now in the US, except perhaps in North Dakota. Meanwhile, however, many continue to sit high and mighty assuming that they are untouchable.


I have to tell the truth, living in ND, I havent seen any decrease in the economy.

[amkari]

I got WIC, cash aid, food stamps, and medi-Cal for a few months while I appealed my unemployment denial. Since my unemployment came through I only get WIC, food stamps and medi-cal. If / when DS's dad starts paying child support again I probably won't qualify. If / when I ever manage to locate DD's dad and IF I get any child support from that direction, I know I won't.

I hate the fact that I qualify, I hate the fact that I have to go down to the Human Services office on a regular basis (filthy place), and I hate all the hoops I have to jump through... keeping up with the paperwork is almost a full time job by itself. lol

BUT... I am extremely grateful that it is there.

It has allowed me to keep DS in a safe neighborhood and a fantastic school. It has also allowed me to stay home with the baby for almost 10 months now. My current unemployment extension will run through her first birthday and there is a second one I can apply for if necessary for another 20 weeks. I've only recently began seriously looking for work since I really wanted to stay at home with DD for as long as humanly possible. Fortunately my unemployment checks are still above Ca minimum wage for a 40 hr week. Not by much though.

[Camille]

I'm so sorry that so many are struggling right now.


While Michigan is the worst state you can be in right now, I'd be willing to say that nobody is safe anywhere right now in the US, except perhaps in North Dakota. Meanwhile, however, many continue to sit high and mighty assuming that they are untouchable.

I'm in MI. Even with a BS in Business Admin, I can't get a min wage job (they must all think I'm joking or something, IDK). :( Honestly, at this point, anything is better than nothing, kwim?


Yes, I am ashamed that I rec' assistance. I know I can do better. I know my kids deserve better. I made close to 20/hour before 9/11... was laid off for l.o.w. and went to college thinking when I finished my degree the economy would be better.... so being on assistance now just plain fucking sucks. The job market in my state... god, it's just horrible here... and I feel trapped in this state because my oldest's father would throw a damn fit if I moved somewhere else.


Sorry for the rantfest. Just bummed because all my efforts at getting a job seem to be going absolutely nowhere. :(

[HammBugga]

I did at first. I never thought I would need assistance, to go from an income of $120k one year to just over 40k the next, well that sort of thing humbles you really quickly. I have learned a lot over the past year and a half and I am not ashamed anymore. When I have needed assistance it has been beyond my control.

[Meredith]

We receive a few forms of public assistance. I used to be embarrassed about it, but I'm not anymore. I've had really severe PPD and anxiety since Dax was about 3-4 months old, and working just isn't an option for me. I've considered filing for disability, but I've been told that the process is a nightmare for even the most severe disabilities, and I can't handle any extra stress. We got to the point where we just couldn't make ends meet anymore.

[still_me]

Thank you all for sharing your stories. I'm sorry for everyone who is struggling right now.

DH lost his job with an 8hr notice. They told him in the morning that he'd be done at the end of the day. This was after 2 talks about how if they ever did go under, he'd be the last one to go. One happened 5 days before they laid him off. At first, I didn't want help either. I was embarrassed until I came to the understanding in my heart and soul that we didn't need to feel that way. Having it helped out tremendously. I'm thankful for it.

In related news, DH landed a job yesterday. I can see light back in his eyes again. He was really getting antsy, and no matter how much he did work around here, he was starting to get frustrated. We'll keep the boys on the medical card until DH's insurance kicks in.

[Candi]

I believe that public assistance is to help you get out of a difficult situation, not to help you sustain a SAHM life, or anything other kind of long term life.

I have gotten public assistance. Before I got it I made sure the budget really wouldn't stretch. The TV was turned off and our cell phones were closed. I was not a SAHM but because of the cost of daycare, I would work the night shift.

We were put in this situation because my DH was laid off. He worked part time jobs until he got a good full time job and we were able to pull ourselves off of public assistance.

[Candi]

and I feel trapped in this state because my oldest's father would throw a damn fit if I moved somewhere else.

:(


Who cares? You know your kids are #1 to you, and if it bothers you not to be able to provide for them, move!

[still_me]

Who cares? You know your kids are #1 to you, and if it bothers you not to be able to provide for them, move!


Um, she probably cares because the father has to give permission for the child to move out of state. Also, if the child has a relationship with their father, it isn't just as simple as finding a place to go.

[Candi]

Um, she probably cares because the father has to give permission for the child to move out of state. Also, if the child has a relationship with their father, it isn't just as simple as finding a place to go.


No, they don't, at least not in PA.

And I understand the whole relationship with the father thing, but she did not say she did want to leave because the kids would miss thier father, she said she didn't want to leave because he would throw a fit.

[still_me]

Interesting that they don't in PA. They do in OH. My sister lives in PA and she had to get an okay from her XH. She ended up not moving, but there was a process she had already started.

[Candi]

Interesting that they don't in PA. They do in OH. My sister lives in PA and she had to get an okay from her XH. She ended up not moving, but there was a process she had already started.


hmmm, perhaps I'm wrong then. I have known people who have left the state. The XH was responsible for trasporting them back to PA for visitation once or twice a year. Even if there is a process I can't imagine a court denying you leaving if you need to find a job to provide for your children. hmmmmm

[Justicedog]

I'm so sorry that so many are struggling right now.


While Michigan is the worst state you can be in right now, I'd be willing to say that nobody is safe anywhere right now in the US, except perhaps in North Dakota. Meanwhile, however, many continue to sit high and mighty assuming that they are untouchable.


Those around the District of Columbia are pretty safe as the Federal Government is the biggest employer. Although State cops in my state are being furloughed. I guess tomorrow when I go to court and pay my speeding ticket, I'll help them out. -- We all help in our own little ways. :)

My kids were watching Nickolodian (sp?) and there was a show where two adults (presumably social worker/psychologist types) were talking to a bunch of kids about the economy. That got my kids scared. I explained to them that dh's job is extremely stable - short of a complete collapse of the United States or an act of Congress, he's got his job. My job is pretty secure as well, if fact, it's needed more. Only thing is I likely won't be getting a raise in the next year or five as contract negotiations are coming soon and our management will use the economy as a reason not to pay us decently and our union won't be able to do anything. I told my kids that even if I lost my job, we'd survive decently on dh's salary. DS told me that Arby's is hiring and he'd like me to work there so he can get free meals.

Answering the OP --

I never had to apply for assistance, I would be ashamed to apply and receive it. Though, I'd reason that I've paid in and if it were legitimate, I'd also believe it fair to receive. So, contrary as that answer may be, depending on my mood, I'd feel both. I do think that if I was physically able, had time to do so, I'd try to do some volunteer work somewhere to sort or make up the karma.

With regard to those who receive, I have different feelings as I believe that there are different types of folks who receive. I think the majority of the folks receiving shouldn't feel shame or guilt. That's why these programs are there - for temporary help when people have fallen on hard times. They've put into the system, will put into the system again so there's no need for guilt. They didn't plan on needing assistance and they aren't contributing to their needing assistance.

ETA: I agree with a prior poster that I don't think assistance is designed to support a SAHM lifestyle. I don't think the choice to SAH is a good enough reason to be on assistance. I can understand though where, because of child care costs, it wouldn't make sense to not stay at home, but I think that it's negligent to not consider that when planning to have a child. If there's been a lowering of WOH parent's income, it makes sense to then need assistance.

[more_creme]

My family has received food, housing and medical assistance in the past, as well as unemployment assistance. I've never felt any shame about it, though I didn't enjoy being in those circumstances. I worked my butt off no matter what my economic status was, and did everything in my power to provide the best life possible for my kids.

I suspect sometimes that people who feel shame in applying for social security assistance (which is what welfare is, you know) feel a sense of superiority to "those people" in the welfare office. It's difficult to accept that without that steady weekly paycheck, we're all pretty much the same folks in the same boat.

I don't understand feeling guilty for needing help. I guess I never bought into the myth of American rugged individualism. To me a healthier, more sustainable American Dream involves all of us helping each other out.

[more_creme]

You might be surprised to learn that social security assistance, historically, was designed to support "SAHM lifestyle."

The system was originally constructed to support mothers who had been widowed or abandoned by their husbands. It was considered a mother's pension and was specifically instituted with the intention of allowing single mothers to stay home and care for their children, as during that time (middle class) social mores dictated that was the proper place for women and more healthy for children. (In reality, poor and working class women have always worked, but middle class values underwrote the Social Security Act).

Even when the SSA was revised during the Eisenhower era War on Poverty, the expectation was still that single mothers would stay home.

After the feminist revolution and resultant changing attitudes led to more middle class women entering the workforce, social values started to change. During the Reagan years the war on poverty shifted to a war of welfare moms, the myth of the welfare queen was born (it is a myth that can be directly traced to a falsehood in a Reagan speech) that legislative efforts started changing to reflect changing social values.

This reached an apex during the 90s Republican led, Clinton approved "welfare reform" which defederalized what had formerly been a federal guarantee and put in place strict work requirements and time limits on assistance, as well as radically cutting benefits to even the most needy families.

Yes, I am the Cliff Clavin of welfare history. Sorry for the tangent.

[Candi]

The system was originally constructed to support mothers who had been widowed or abandoned by their husbands.


But this makes sense. Even today, the cost of child care often outweighs the cost of a job. When I say that public assistance should not support a SAHM lifestyle, I am also assuming that dad is in the picture. Or perhaps grandparents.

I agree it is difficult for an uneducated/unskilled single mother to find a job that will cover for the cost of child care, unless that child care is also subsidized.

[amkari]

"I don't think assistance is designed to support a SAHM lifestyle."

Since I think this could have possibly been referring to my comment about having been able to stay at home with my DD thanks to unemployment and other assistance...

I was laid off in August 2008 at 6 mo pregnant... NOBODY is going to hire someone who is 6 mo pregnant. Regardless of the fact that is illegal to consider or discriminate for it, it just doesn't happen. I was on disability from Oct. through January. During this entire time I was trying to make a serious go of building my Avon business in the hopes that it would become enough to live on. That came to a screeching halt during a 1.5 mo battle with pneumonia.

After continuing to watch the classifieds and job posting sites, only to find that there wasn't anything that paid enough to be worth it, I decided to wait it out a bit longer. Financially, I was better off with my unemployment than many of the jobs available since the salaries were just high enough to disqualify me for any assistance but not enough to be able to pay transportation, childcare, housing, food, and utilities. My parents completely refused to babysit until DD would take a bottle / sippy or was primarily on solid food. The few times I left her with them so I could take care of some stuff, all she did was scream. One time for several hours and they never called to let me know. What irritated me then is that my sister was there and could have nursed DD (niece is 2 mo younger) rather than let her scream. She knew that I would have preferred that. Apparently DD's screaming and crying hadn't bothered her enough yet although it woke up both her kids.

Unfortunately, I signed the lease on my house before being laid off so I was stuck for at least 10 mo with $1325 rent. Once the lease was up this summer, I was still unable to move... nobody wants to rent to a single mom receiving unemployment. I know.. I looked and I talked to tons of people who had places for rent.

So... at least my unemployment covers rent and utilities. I did a little babysitting over the summer for a friend and I still have an active Avon business. Those 2 things, along with tax refunds have helped to cover gas and other expenses. I would be buried without the food stamps and WIC though.

Thank God my truck is paid for. lol Other than gifts, all of DD's clothes and most of her few toys have come from craigslist. DS got new shoes and one new outfit for school thanks to free Khol's cash... even he has gotten craigslist clothes although he doesn't know it (they just showed up in the laundry as far as he is concerned. We rarely eat out anymore and have discovered a wealth of freebie activities around town.


It's amazing to me that I have been able to adjust pretty easily to $1500-$1700 a month when I was used to $3500-$4500 per month for the last 12 years. I certainly never planned to have a 2nd child... why would I when DS was half grown? lol But I'm happier and more at peace than I have been in my entire life.

[Candi]

I think everyone has thier own personal reasons and situations so I'm not talking to anybody in particular.

But lets say some one gets welfare and food stamps. They decide not to work because it would even out after the cost of child care and supporting themselves. This person would have made the conscious decision to earn less just to claim public assitance. When they could have made out the same if they had a job.

Notice this does not refer to someone that would not be able to pay for houseing and childcare with a min wage job, if thats all they could get. I'm talking about when it all evens out and they would just "prefer" to be home the kids.

[Justicedog]

I hadn't read your post (or if I did, it wasn't something in my mind when I posted my post).

It was my understanding that in order to get unemployment one is supposed to be ready, willing and able to work and must be actively searching for a job.

I don't lump unemployment in with welfare, I see that more as an insurance benefit.

ETA: What Candi says makes sense. I agree.

[Candi]

I hadn't read your post (or if I did, it wasn't something in my mind when I posted my post).

It was my understanding that in order to get unemployment one is supposed to be ready, willing and able to work and must be actively searching for a job.

I don't lump unemployment in with welfare, I see that more as an insurance benefit.

ETA: What Candi says makes sense. I agree.


Supposidly, but they don't make you prove that you are looking anymore. And I agree unemployment is more of an insurance paid by you and your previous company. Also you don't recieve it if you are voluntarly unemployed (wow, I used to know how to spell, LOL)

My concern for this person is when thier unemployment runs out. I assume she has a backup plan. My DH is collecting unemployment right now too. He is taking the time to find a job that pays as well as his last one, and its hard. He thinks he has a year and a half, but really you don't know if you will have that long until your first six months is up, then if the extension is still available you could have longer (I'm in PA)

[HammBugga]

I think everyone has thier own personal reasons and situations so I'm not talking to anybody in particular.

But lets say some one gets welfare and food stamps. They decide not to work because it would even out after the cost of child care and supporting themselves. This person would have made the conscious decision to earn less just to claim public assitance. When they could have made out the same if they had a job.

Notice this does not refer to someone that would not be able to pay for houseing and childcare with a min wage job, if thats all they could get. I'm talking about when it all evens out and they would just "prefer" to be home the kids.
You can't just decide not to work on cash aid. You have to spend 32 hours a week actively looking for a job, usually in the work force building. If you fail to meet your personal plan they reduce your benefit by 40%. I can tell you that 60% of what is available for cash aid for a family of 4 in my state is about $390 a month.

[amkari]

At the moment I am going through the background investigation for the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Dept as well as the LAX Police Dept. It looks like an academy date could be possible early next year. I have no doubt that I'll pass, I was cleared by the Federal Bureau of Prisons 12 yrs ago and other than my credit going to shit over this last year they won't find anything to disqualify me.

It also looks like my BIL will be taking over a wind energy site in Montana in a couple months and will probably need a new office manager. If so, he has said he will bring me out there for that. Then my sis will be my daycare. lol

I'm trying to get approval from EDD to go back to school and finish my degree while still collecting unemployment. I'm also making arrangements to test out of as many college credits as I can.

In the meantime, I have 16 weeks of unemployment left with another 20 week extension available after that.

[more_creme]

But this makes sense. Even today, the cost of child care often outweighs the cost of a job. When I say that public assistance should not support a SAHM lifestyle, I am also assuming that dad is in the picture. Or perhaps grandparents.

I agree it is difficult for an uneducated/unskilled single mother to find a job that will cover for the cost of child care, unless that child care is also subsidized.

Unfortunately for many working class families, even middle class families, the full cost of child care is still out of reach.

I know I'm veering into a different philosophical discussion here, but I feel strongly that providing child care is a full time job worthy of financial compensation. It never made sense to me that the government will subsidize childcare so that poor / working class parents can work outside the home earning less than a living wage - but is unwilling to subsidize a parent to stay home and care for their own child.

Subsidizing family based child care is more cost efficient and (arguably) may promote family and financial stability.

Subsidizing childcare outside the home costs more, and in the current welfare system parents who receive TANF cash benefits are required to accept jobs that do not pay enough to support their families. In fact, in some states parents are required to do community service work if they are unable to find paid work, but the state will subsidize their outside child care. That makes zero sense.

I will note that it's difficult to make generalizations about the current welfare system because rules vary greatly from state to state since 1996 PRWORA (welfare reform).

[more_creme]

I think everyone has thier own personal reasons and situations so I'm not talking to anybody in particular.

But lets say some one gets welfare and food stamps. They decide not to work because it would even out after the cost of child care and supporting themselves. This person would have made the conscious decision to earn less just to claim public assitance. When they could have made out the same if they had a job.

Notice this does not refer to someone that would not be able to pay for houseing and childcare with a min wage job, if thats all they could get. I'm talking about when it all evens out and they would just "prefer" to be home the kids.

While there are always some people who take advantage of any system (including wealthy, tax-evading capitalists), the statistical reality is that in the welfare state these people are very few are far between. In some regions it looks different because of urban poverty concentrations and the different pressures they face, but realistically very few people con the welfare state.

For one thing, the rules (even differing among the states) make it very difficult. Families in every state are required to meet minimum work requirements in order to receive cash assistance. There are waivers for special circumstances, but they are not easy to get.

There are no work requirements for food and medical assistance, but unless one has a housing subsidy it's hard to support a family without cash. Some people work under the table to make ends meet.

As for housing, in every major metro region the housing waiting lists are ridiculously long. There are waiting lists to get on the lists. In many areas, subsidized housing is being demolished and there are fewer replacement units (see public housing history in Chicago since 1998).

I know everybody and her sister will pull out a story about somebody they knew who took advantage of the system. I'll maintain the anecdotal evidence looks strong but is extremely misleading.

[more_creme]

I hadn't read your post (or if I did, it wasn't something in my mind when I posted my post).

It was my understanding that in order to get unemployment one is supposed to be ready, willing and able to work and must be actively searching for a job.

I don't lump unemployment in with welfare, I see that more as an insurance benefit.

ETA: What Candi says makes sense. I agree.

Speaking of anecdotes, I have seen a lot more abuse of the unemployment system than I have ever witnessed of the welfare system. I never hear people complaining about unemployment cheats. I'm talking about the tradesmen who work seasonally and then take unemployment for the cold months. I'm talking about people who lose their jobs an then falsify job search records for months and months and months.

They justify it by saying "I paid into the unemployment system, I deserve to get this back."

But the same argument could be made for any person who has ever worked and then uses social security assistance (welfare). Yet we demonize welfare mothers and turn a blind eye to common unemployment cheating.

It really gets my goat when unemployment cheats complain about welfare queens.

But I digress, again. Sorry.

[Candi]

You can't just decide not to work on cash aid. You have to spend 32 hours a week actively looking for a job, usually in the work force building. If you fail to meet your personal plan they reduce your benefit by 40%. I can tell you that 60% of what is available for cash aid for a family of 4 in my state is about $390 a month.


hmmm, how do they know this? Refering to people who abuse the system, I know of some that definatly do not do this. Is it possible it's a state thing?

[Candi]

I know I'm veering into a different philosophical discussion here, but I feel strongly that providing child care is a full time job worthy of financial compensation. It never made sense to me that the government will subsidize childcare so that poor / working class parents can work outside the home earning less than a living wage - but is unwilling to subsidize a parent to stay home and care for their own child.



Again, refering to what I believe is misuse of the system, my niece worked weekends but got child care subsidy during the week. She would send her child to day care 2 days a week for free so she could clean, ugh!

I see what you are saying about child care. My only arguement is that if someone needs assistance, they should be trying to make a living on thier own so that they no longer need government assistance. A mother who has decided to stay at home and no longer pursue that, is not trying to get off the system.

[more_creme]

hmmm, how do they know this? Refering to people who abuse the system, I know of some that definatly do not do this. Is it possible it's a state thing?

There are work requirements in every state for cash assistance.

If you know people who are receiving "welfare" who are not required to work or look for work, they either don't get cash or they have a (rare and difficult to get) work requirement waiver.

"They" know because extensive documentation of work search and/or work activity is required, and if you don't show proof they will cut your benefits or cut you off completely. The proof is much more strict that for unemployment bennies.

In some states, attending college does not count toward meeting the work requirement. Some activists in some states successfully had this changed so some education hours can be counted.

[more_creme]

hmmm, how do they know this? Refering to people who abuse the system, I know of some that definatly do not do this. Is it possible it's a state thing?


Again, refering to what I believe is misuse of the system, my niece worked weekends but got child care subsidy during the week. She would send her child to day care 2 days a week for free so she could clean, ugh!

:shrug:
I don't get what your problem is here. She was working outside the home. As for using weekday childcare to clean her home, cleaning her home is work. Just happens that it's not acknowledged as having monetary value in our culture.

[more_creme]

Supposidly, but they don't make you prove that you are looking anymore. And I agree unemployment is more of an insurance paid by you and your previous company. Also you don't recieve it if you are voluntarly unemployed (wow, I used to know how to spell, LOL)

My concern for this person is when thier unemployment runs out. I assume she has a backup plan. My DH is collecting unemployment right now too. He is taking the time to find a job that pays as well as his last one, and its hard. He thinks he has a year and a half, but really you don't know if you will have that long until your first six months is up, then if the extension is still available you could have longer (I'm in PA)

And "welfare" is a social insurance paid for by our income taxes. There's really no difference conceptually. In practice, workers get much more cash from unemployment and it is a much easier system to take advantage of.

Wait, wait... before somebody goes off about welfare cheats who never work to pay into the system, let me remind you that the vast majority of persons who ever receive "welfare" (meaning cash benefits) do so for two years or less. The vast majority of those people go on to work in the legal economy and pay into taxes, more than making up for the relatively small amount they used to care for their children while out of work.

[amkari]

Looking for work is not necessarily a requirement for receiving unemployment. In CA there is a box on the form that is checked if you are REQUIRED to look for work and to document information about where, when, and contact info. So far, I haven't had that box checked yet.

I'm not sure what the criteria is for having it checked vs. not... but unemployment rate in my county was over 11% last time I checked. Maybe that has something to do with it?

[Candi]

:shrug:
I don't get what your problem is here. She was working outside the home. As for using weekday childcare to clean her home, cleaning her home is work. Just happens that it's not acknowledged as having monetary value in our culture.

Subsusided child care is meant to help you work or find work. I believe most SAHMs here would agree that although it is not fun, you could very well clean your house and watch your own children.

[Candi]

Looking for work is not necessarily a requirement for receiving unemployment. In CA there is a box on the form that is checked if you are REQUIRED to look for work and to document information about where, when, and contact info. So far, I haven't had that box checked yet.

I'm not sure what the criteria is for having it checked vs. not... but unemployment rate in my county was over 11% last time I checked. Maybe that has something to do with it?

In pa technically it is a requirement, but they don't check anymore. You used to have to bring in proof.

[Candi]

And "welfare" is a social insurance paid for by our income taxes. There's really no difference conceptually. In practice, workers get much more cash from unemployment and it is a much easier system to take advantage of.


The difference to me is that you have to have worked to get unemployement. therefore you have paid into the system, and the amount you get varies on what it was paid.

Wait, wait... before somebody goes off about welfare cheats who never work to pay into the system, let me remind you that the vast majority of persons who ever receive "welfare" (meaning cash benefits) do so for two years or less....

And that is awesome. But if they are using it to be SAHM's, how is it they are only using it for 2 years?



Need to put words here, LOL

[more_creme]

Subsusided child care is meant to help you work or find work. I believe most SAHMs here would agree that although it is not fun, you could very well clean your house and watch your own children.

But she is working. Who takes care of the children while she is working?

I do see your point. I'm sure she's not cleaning her house for 16 hours a week. She can and should be using that time to look for more work, and her failure to do so is likely short-sighted.

It's not the worst case of system abuse I've heard of, but it's definitely not fair to those parents who are on a waiting list or who are disqualified for some petty technicality.

[Candi]

But she is working. Who takes care of the children while she is working?

I do see your point. I'm sure she's not cleaning her house for 16 hours a week. She can and should be using that time to look for more work, and her failure to do so is likely short-sighted.

It's not the worst case of system abuse I've heard of, but it's definitely not fair to those parents who are on a waiting list or who are disqualified for some petty technicality.


Her mother takes care of her son when she is working weekends. And I agree, it's not the worst abuse out there. It just bums me out when I see all the name brand clothes she buys new for her son, and her expensive purses. She works during the week now, still get subsided child care, and is saving to buy a $100K house. I'm probably just jealous.

[Candi]

I think I am afraid of this theory of democracy:

A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.

The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:


From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage.


I'm afraid of the country as a whole getting too close to complacency, apathy and dependence.

[still_me]

My family has received food, housing and medical assistance in the past, as well as unemployment assistance. I've never felt any shame about it, though I didn't enjoy being in those circumstances. I worked my butt off no matter what my economic status was, and did everything in my power to provide the best life possible for my kids.

I suspect sometimes that people who feel shame in applying for social security assistance (which is what welfare is, you know) feel a sense of superiority to "those people" in the welfare office. It's difficult to accept that without that steady weekly paycheck, we're all pretty much the same folks in the same boat.

I don't understand feeling guilty for needing help. I guess I never bought into the myth of American rugged individualism. To me a healthier, more sustainable American Dream involves all of us helping each other out.


This is reaching, IMO. I don't know if it is because we were in this situation and it is emotional, but this stings.

[Candi]

I felt the shame because I want to support my family on my own. I didn't want hand outs. The only reason I even took it was because I have children. I know there are always people out there worse off than me, and I would rather that they have it.

[Shaunsmom]

At the moment I am going through the background investigation for the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Dept as well as the LAX Police Dept. It looks like an academy date could be possible early next year. I have no doubt that I'll pass, I was cleared by the Federal Bureau of Prisons 12 yrs ago and other than my credit going to shit over this last year they won't find anything to disqualify me.
It also looks like my BIL will be taking over a wind energy site in Montana in a couple months and will probably need a new office manager. If so, he has said he will bring me out there for that. Then my sis will be my daycare. lol

I'm trying to get approval from EDD to go back to school and finish my degree while still collecting unemployment. I'm also making arrangements to test out of as many college credits as I can.

In the meantime, I have 16 weeks of unemployment left with another 20 week extension available after that.

For LASD as well as LAPD, do you go thru the Academy first, then apply for any job openings?

Here at our police dept., you go thru the hiring process first for the officer position, then once you interview and get the job, you go thru the Academy once you actually have the job. The company pays you to go thru the Academy as you are now an officer of XYZ police dept.

I've watched that TV show, The Academy where it follows the students in the Academy for the LASD...interesting show to say the least.

How do you pay for the Academy if you are accepted?

[more_creme]

This is reaching, IMO. I don't know if it is because we were in this situation and it is emotional, but this stings.

I'm not applying my statement to anybody here. I don't think it's reaching, I've witnessed a lot of that attitude as an activist and an educator. Heck, as a debater, too.

I don't think everybody who feels bad in the welfare office feels that way, but I've known enough people who feel superior to poor people to suspect that some people do feel that way when faced with similar circumstances.

[more_creme]

I felt the shame because I want to support my family on my own. I didn't want hand outs. The only reason I even took it was because I have children. I know there are always people out there worse off than me, and I would rather that they have it.

Social security assistance is not a handout.

I understand that many people feel that way, but it's not. It's tax supported social insurance.

I understand what you mean about people out there who are worse off, though. I've struggled with that at times.

What gets me more, though, are the hardworking poor and working classes who earn just enough money to disqualify for social assistance, but not enough to make ends meet. In many ways, they are "worse off" than families who are getting a "full ride" through food stamps, medical, housing and child care assistance. (I don't mention cash because in my experience the amount of cash benefits is negligible.)

[amkari]

For LASD you have to go through the written test first. Once you pass that you are scheduled for an oral interview. Passing the oral interview gets you scheduled for the background prescreening interview where you turn in your background information packet. At some point you are scheduled for your polygraph.

Once all of that is cleared you can get a job offer and academy date. You are paid while you attend the academy... about $4700-$5200 per month depending on wether you have a degree or not.

My sis and I both took the last written tests for this year. They have 2 more academies this year, Oct and Dec, but they are full. They also anticipate possibly cancelling them due to budget issues. They are pushing through backgrounds as fast as possible right now to get a good solid list of qualified applicants for when they can open up mor academy dates.

LAXPD is taking a bit longer... but ultimately you go through the regular LAPD academy and then an additional academy training specifically for the airport.

Once I get through the process of applying and get accepted it should be a breeze. I've already taken all the CORE and P.O.S.T certifications as a correctional officer. Unfortunately they are no longer current since I left that job due to retaliatory harassment and stress following a workers comp knee surgery back in 2003. It's amazing how difficult an environment it becomes when your warden and supervisors are trying to get rid of you. Physically it will be challenging but I'm already working out a couple hrs a day trying to drop the weight in order to meet the requirements.

[Candi]

Social security assistance is not a handout.

I understand that many people feel that way, but it's not. It's tax supported social insurance.

I understand what you mean about people out there who are worse off, though. I've struggled with that at times.

What gets me more, though, are the hardworking poor and working classes who earn just enough money to disqualify for social assistance, but not enough to make ends meet. In many ways, they are "worse off" than families who are getting a "full ride" through food stamps, medical, housing and child care assistance. (I don't mention cash because in my experience the amount of cash benefits is negligible.)

OK, well I guess I don't like how social insurance sounds so, well, socialist LOL

But I so, so agree about the hardworking class of poor. I feel so bad for this one guy I work with. His GF and babies momma just left him. Her and her mother are abusers of the system. She has also been busted for herione usage. He currently has temporary custody of the kids and can't even get assisted child care. He doesn't get any assistance. Thank god his church helped him out last month with money for rent, because he has lawyer bills now too.

[HammBugga]

This is reaching, IMO. I don't know if it is because we were in this situation and it is emotional, but this stings.


I think you are confused about what Creme meant. I believe she meant that sometimes people collecting social security look down on those collecting welfare but what they don't realize is, social security IS welfare so they are essentially in the same boat.

[Candi]

I'm not applying my statement to anybody here. I don't think it's reaching, I've witnessed a lot of that attitude as an activist and an educator. Heck, as a debater, too.

I don't think everybody who feels bad in the welfare office feels that way, but I've known enough people who feel superior to poor people to suspect that some people do feel that way when faced with similar circumstances.


I think you are confused about what Creme meant. I believe she meant that sometimes people collecting social security look down on those collecting welfare but what they don't realize is, social security IS welfare so they are essentially in the same boat.


.....

[Justicedog]

Social security is two prong. There's the forced retirement (government pension) and disability insurance SSDI portion and there's the pure welfare portion - SSI.

I guess there's also the widows and wife's prong as well, but that's lumped in there with either the government pention or the welfare depending on how much money to which they'd be entitled.

[tata]

Coming in late (I was moving all weekend long), but I have these things to add:

I receive financial aid to attend college, medical aid and food stamps for the entire family. I'm not ashamed at all to receive any of this aid. I am now working again (Federal Work Study) and going to school so that I won't need this aid forever. I hate receiving aid for a couple of reasons: first and foremost, it pains me that I cannot earn a substantial enough living to provide for myself and my kids. Secondly, I loathe the waiting, the paperwork and seemingly perpetual bad mood of the case workers.

That said, I wanted to add that I have only ever received cash benefits once, the month after I left my DD's father. It was even worse WRT paperwork and bad moods of case workers (who wouldn't be in a bad mood with all that paperwork?!). I was given a small amount of credit for hours I attended class, but had to bother my instructors to fill out all sorts of forms that the government required as proof of "working." I also had to actively look for a job and submit more paperwork to keep receiving the cash benefits. Ultimately, I decided that for me personally and my situation, it wasn't worth the extra hassle.

And I pretty much agree with everything creme posted.

[more_creme]

No, I'm specifically talking about people who look down on those poor people at the welfare office (the cheats, the tax suckers, the lowlifes, the bums who live on handouts) and then one day find themselves at the welfare office because they need help. I suspect that some of them feel guilty or ashamed because they still feel a sense of superiority, they can't classify themselves with "those poor people".

I'm confusing the issue by referring to "welfare" as "social security assistance" - which is what it really is. TANF (cash assistance), food stamps and Medicaid are all part of Social Security, as are Medicare, social security pensions (SSI) and social security disability (SSDI).

Those are all different parts of the same umbrella under the Social Security Act.

[BeanBabies]

I agree Creme. I think a lot of people think most welfare recipients are low-life, trailer-trash, 3rd generation welfare slobs. Since they think that, they automatically assume that people would think that of them as well.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Supposidly, but they don't make you prove that you are looking anymore. And I agree unemployment is more of an insurance paid by you and your previous company. Also you don't recieve it if you are voluntarly unemployed (wow, I used to know how to spell, LOL)

My concern for this person is when thier unemployment runs out. I assume she has a backup plan. My DH is collecting unemployment right now too. He is taking the time to find a job that pays as well as his last one, and its hard. He thinks he has a year and a half, but really you don't know if you will have that long until your first six months is up, then if the extension is still available you could have longer (I'm in PA)
I find it strange that you apply different rules for your own family than to others. You look down on a woman who may not be working because she'll make no more than she will on assistance, yet your husband remains on unemployment assistance so that he can "find a job that pays as well as the last one." If it's soooooo important that someone work regardless of how much he/she will make, then why can't he take a job that pays less?


I think you are confused about what Creme meant. I believe she meant that sometimes people collecting social security look down on those collecting welfare but what they don't realize is, social security IS welfare so they are essentially in the same boat.
I understand both sides of the argument here. People don't pay directly into our own fund for future benefits for food stamps, cash assistance (what most people call "welfare"), and Medicaid. However, people can't receive social security unless the person (or spouse or parent) has paid into the system; also, the amount received is based on how much was paid in. This isn't the same as the other programs, and it isn't based on income.


Social security is two prong. There's the forced retirement (government pension) and disability insurance SSDI portion and there's the pure welfare portion - SSI.
This is not correct. SSI (Supplemental Security Income) is funded by general tax revenues, not by social security taxes. The only thing that SSI has to do with social security is that it is administered by the Social Security Administration, but the funding for the two programs is entirely different, as are many of the requirements for receiving aid under the programs.


I agree Creme. I think a lot of people think most welfare recipients are low-life, trailer-trash, 3rd generation welfare slobs. Since they think that, they automatically assume that people would think that of them as well.
That used to the be mentality around here. However, now what I see is more of the "Only my aid is okay" mentality—you know, because they're really trying, but the others receiving it are just lazy asses.

[Justicedog]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justicedog
Social security is two prong. There's the forced retirement (government pension) and disability insurance SSDI portion and there's the pure welfare portion - SSI.

This is not correct. SSI (Supplemental Security Income) is funded by general tax revenues, not by social security taxes. The only thing that SSI has to do with social security is that it is administered by the Social Security Administration, but the funding for the two programs is entirely different, as are many of the requirements for receiving aid under the programs.


Hmm, I thought that's what I said - there's the two prongs - one, the social security pension and SSDI which is the government forced savings/retirement, the one that people put in money for and get a return based on what they put in. The other part of social security is the SSI, which is pure welfare, not based on what is put into the system.

SSI is not social security pensions. SSI is Supplemental Security Income, welfare so that each person can have some minimal amount of money to live on regardless of what was paid into the system.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justicedog
Social security is two prong. There's the forced retirement (government pension) and disability insurance SSDI portion and there's the pure welfare portion - SSI.



Hmm, I thought that's what I said - there's the two prongs - one, the social security pension and SSDI which is the government forced savings/retirement, the one that people put in money for and get a return based on what they put in. The other part of social security is the SSI, which is pure welfare, not based on what is put into the system.

SSI is not social security pensions. SSI is Supplemental Security Income, welfare so that each person can have some minimal amount of money to live on regardless of what was paid into the system.
But the issue here is that SSI does not come out of social security funding; many people believe it does, but it does not. (That's what I thought you were saying. I'm sorry if I misunderstood.) Also, not everyone can receive SSI; it depends on income (at least for adults).

[still_me]

While I don't doubt the mentalities posted by Creme and Judy, I have come to realize that maybe my mindset is just that obscured by our area. The area that I live in has had a high welfare rate for the last 15yrs. Since the area is largely factories and a shipping business that has slowed (can't say because it would so give away my area) I think we've seen a lot of people struggle in our area for a longer amount of time than bigger cities, ect.

I *know* that every sees this, but area is a close community. Many times after hearing about a business closing we can list people we know (or know of) that work there. Because of that, I think I'm either optimistic that the people we know don't feel that way, or I am that ignorant of the dislike.

[Justicedog]

But the issue here is that SSI does not come out of social security funding; many people believe it does, but it does not. (That's what I thought you were saying. I'm sorry if I misunderstood.) Also, not everyone can receive SSI; it depends on income (at least for adults).


I don't think I was addressing where the money came from for the programs. Just that there were two separate ones, one of them was welfare based (which I guessed was known to not be the same money people pay into when they work.) So, it's good you pointed it out, but it was more of a piggybacking rather than a "this is not correct."

SSI is disability/age and income and asset based. One gets a minimal amount, in the $627 range. One can have earned $400 in Social Security Retirement money. They'd get that, then they'd get SSI of $227 to make up the difference to bring them to that minimal standard.

[JudyJudyJudy]

I understand what you're saying. My point is that no part of the money that is taken from people's paychecks for social security/medicare is simply "welfare"-based (as I said before, SSI comes from general taxes). The part taken from people's paychecks is a fund into which they are paying that they can later (hopefully) withdraw from based on what they've paid in and the number of credits they have. That is why I see it as different from other true "assistance" programs. I don't think it's fair to even call social security "assistance" since people who are worth millions can get it just like others can.

[JudyJudyJudy]

JD, I should add that I think you're right—that we're arguing for the same side here. :p Sometimes I'm thinking in my head one thing, but it comes out differently when I type.

[Mommy2Ella]

Back to the OP. I had state insurance when i found myself pregnant, and unmarried. I am still with the guy, but his company would not allow me to be added until we were married, I had a full time job that didnt offer benefits until 3 months later and I couldnt pay for insurance since I had a pre-existing condition. I actually began to enjoy it because I didnt pay copays for 2 years of myself and the first year of my dds life.

I have a hard time telling people about it. My family seems to add shame to being on "the system." Then after seeing many friends and acquaintances abuse the system, I feel like I got my fair share and now have moved on.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Those around the District of Columbia are pretty safe as the Federal Government is the biggest employer.
Actually, the unemployment rate (http://data.bls.gov/map/servlet/map.servlet.MapToolServlet?survey=la) for DC for July was 10.6 (the data for August hasn't been released yet). The "real" rate is probably even higher than that.

On the bright side, the unemployment rates nationwide reached even higher levels during the 80s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment) (a little over halfway down the page) than they are now, so maybe there's hope.

[Solare]

No, they don't, at least not in PA.

And I understand the whole relationship with the father thing, but she did not say she did want to leave because the kids would miss thier father, she said she didn't want to leave because he would throw a fit.

You can't just blankly say that they don't need permission in PA. It's up to each individual case.

[Camille]

No, they don't, at least not in PA.

And I understand the whole relationship with the father thing, but she did not say she did want to leave because the kids would miss thier father, she said she didn't want to leave because he would throw a fit.

Yes, and my divorce decree states that I have to have his permission to move; he simply wouldn't okay it. To move, I would have to get a waiver from the judge (whom I've dealt with for 12 or so years now), and I know it likely wouldn't end up in my favor.

[Camille]

You can't just decide not to work on cash aid. You have to spend 32 hours a week actively looking for a job, usually in the work force building. If you fail to meet your personal plan they reduce your benefit by 40%. I can tell you that 60% of what is available for cash aid for a family of 4 in my state is about $390 a month.

Here, it's 40 hours a week (between work first and approved job search activities), and the first time you don't meet your requirements, DHS drops your cash completely for 3 mos. The second time, it's cut for 6 months.

For a fam of 4 in MI, cash assistance is $598 a month.

[Camille]

Unfortunately for many working class families, even middle class families, the full cost of child care is still out of reach.

I know I'm veering into a different philosophical discussion here, but I feel strongly that providing child care is a full time job worthy of financial compensation. It never made sense to me that the government will subsidize childcare so that poor / working class parents can work outside the home earning less than a living wage - but is unwilling to subsidize a parent to stay home and care for their own child.

Subsidizing family based child care is more cost efficient and (arguably) may promote family and financial stability.

Subsidizing childcare outside the home costs more, and in the current welfare system parents who receive TANF cash benefits are required to accept jobs that do not pay enough to support their families. In fact, in some states parents are required to do community service work if they are unable to find paid work, but the state will subsidize their outside child care. That makes zero sense.

I will note that it's difficult to make generalizations about the current welfare system because rules vary greatly from state to state since 1996 PRWORA (welfare reform).

I agree with this completely.

My daycare, when all 3 kids attend F/T, gets 7.50 per hour. Minimum wage is 7.40.

[Crystal]

I can honestly say that the vast majority of the 1000+ clients that I have seen in the past two years are *not* cheating the system. I have referred, maybe, 30 people to investigations. An even fewer number of those were actually found guilty of any kind of wrongdoing.

Cash assistance is a really strict, painful to apply for and difficult to keep. The questions that we ask are really personal and occasionally humiliating.

In the state of CA, adults can only be on cash aid for sixty months (five years) out of their lifetime. A single person on cash aid is required to put in 32 hours a week in work related activity. That is 128 hours a month. If you figure that a single mom with two kids is getting, at most, $661 a month (Northern CA) that works out to about $5.16 an hour. That's well below the state minimum wage.

To be exempt from the work program, you must meet one of a few verifiable exemptions. Pregnancy is not an exemption (not even in the last week.) Newborns exempt a woman for six months for the first child. Disability, Caring for someone who is unable to care for themselves (not children), currently attending high school... there are a few others that I can't grab right off the top of my head now.

If a parent chooses not to participate in welfare to work activities, they lose their benefits. So, then, they are receiving benefits for just the children.

There is serious discussion of starting full family sanctions, in which case, a family with a non-participating parent would lose x% of their benefits.

For Food Stamps and Cash Aid, most clients have to send in a report every three months. We can see where and how often they are accessing their benefits. If we don't get their report, or they are out of our area for a month, their benefits discontinue.

When people come into our office they are often desperate, scared, ashamed and angry. There are people who have never been on aid before, and people who can't function and have been on for a long time. The people who have been on for a long time might be more comfortable with us and with the paperwork, but they feel more judged. One woman recently told me about a cashier who told her that she should just get a fucking job and stop being such a waste of space. She was almost in tears talking about it.

Being on welfare is really hard. It's a lot of work for very little payoff. People don't stay on it because it's easy.

[Camille]

I can honestly say that the vast majority of the 1000+ clients that I have seen in the past two years are *not* cheating the system. I have referred, maybe, 30 people to investigations. An even fewer number of those were actually found guilty of any kind of wrongdoing.

Cash assistance is a really strict, painful to apply for and difficult to keep. The questions that we ask are really personal and occasionally humiliating.

In the state of CA, adults can only be on cash aid for sixty months (five years) out of their lifetime. A single person on cash aid is required to put in 32 hours a week in work related activity. That is 128 hours a month. If you figure that a single mom with two kids is getting, at most, $661 a month (Northern CA) that works out to about $5.16 an hour. That's well below the state minimum wage.

To be exempt from the work program, you must meet one of a few verifiable exemptions. Pregnancy is not an exemption (not even in the last week.) Newborns exempt a woman for six months for the first child. Disability, Caring for someone who is unable to care for themselves (not children), currently attending high school... there are a few others that I can't grab right off the top of my head now.

If a parent chooses not to participate in welfare to work activities, they lose their benefits. So, then, they are receiving benefits for just the children.

There is serious discussion of starting full family sanctions, in which case, a family with a non-participating parent would lose x% of their benefits.

For Food Stamps and Cash Aid, most clients have to send in a report every three months. We can see where and how often they are accessing their benefits. If we don't get their report, or they are out of our area for a month, their benefits discontinue.

When people come into our office they are often desperate, scared, ashamed and angry. There are people who have never been on aid before, and people who can't function and have been on for a long time. The people who have been on for a long time might be more comfortable with us and with the paperwork, but they feel more judged. One woman recently told me about a cashier who told her that she should just get a fucking job and stop being such a waste of space. She was almost in tears talking about it.

Being on welfare is really hard. It's a lot of work for very little payoff. People don't stay on it because it's easy.

Amotherfuckingmen, to the bold.

It completely pisses me off when people accuse others of "getting rich on welfare".

And, I will repeat once again that I get $598 per month and am required to do 40 hours a week of job search/approved functions to stay in the program. Not fucking easy, actually. At this point, I'm running out of jobs to apply for. 12+ per week... small town... I'm now looking in G.R., where I used to live and don't want to move back to. (about 45 miles from here)

So, let's do the math for a family of 4: $598 a month/40 hrs per week: $7168 per year = $138 per week = 3.45 an hour for a 40 hr work week.

So, uh, for those of you who claim that people "get rich on welfare"... probably ought to try to live off of $7k a year or STFU.

[Camille]

If a parent chooses not to participate in welfare to work activities, they lose their benefits. So, then, they are receiving benefits for just the children.



There is serious discussion of starting full family sanctions, in which case, a family with a non-participating parent would lose x% of their benefits.

From experience, I was sanctioned last summer, and we lost our cash benefits completely for 3 months (dh couldn't work, not getting into it atm). I got food assistance, but only the amount I'd get if we were getting cash, so food benefits were cut by about 10%, cash by 100%

For Food Stamps and Cash Aid, most clients have to send in a report every three months. We can see where and how often they are accessing their benefits. If we don't get their report, or they are out of our area for a month, their benefits discontinue.

It's every 6 months here.



...

[WalkingTittyBar]

I think there is a certain stigma about relying on government assistance because many people associate it with laziness and generations of families who have mis-used it.

When I had ds1, I received WIC and a Medicaid card for him and never really felt ashamed of it. When dh got hurt at work many years ago, I applied for and received food stamps for one month, after we exhausted all of our savings. Luckily his employer finally turned in the Workers Comp claim and dh started receiving his compensation and we no longer needed the food stamps. But I was ashamed when we got them. I guess because I felt like we werent able to provide for ourselves and ds thoroughly.

If I had to apply for assistance now, I probably wouldnt feel so bad due to all the damn taxes we have paid in the past. And now I realized that government assistance is there to be used as a stepping-stone.

[jessiehannan]

I have a question for those who think that the women in a two parent family shouldn't use benefits to stay home with kids. (and I am sorry if this doesn't make any sense)

If that mother worked a minimum wage job, (along with whatever the other parent brought home), qualified for child care subsidies and food stamps, is that any better than staying home until kids are in school and getting food stamps? The first way would be a bigger drain on social services than the second.

[Candi]

I have a question for those who think that the women in a two parent family shouldn't use benefits to stay home with kids. (and I am sorry if this doesn't make any sense)

If that mother worked a minimum wage job, (along with whatever the other parent brought home), qualified for child care subsidies and food stamps, is that any better than staying home until kids are in school and getting food stamps? The first way would be a bigger drain on social services than the second.


Probably not. But you would have two incomes so would you really qualify for child care and food stamps? I suppose with enough kids you may. Or if both mom and dad work min wage. IDK

There is also always 2nd or 3rd shifts so that no day care is needed. We have done this in the past. But that's not what you asked.

[irisheyes81]

Actually, the unemployment rate (http://data.bls.gov/map/servlet/map.servlet.MapToolServlet?survey=la) for DC for July was 10.6 (the data for August hasn't been released yet). The "real" rate is probably even higher than that.

On the bright side, the unemployment rates nationwide reached even higher levels during the 80s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment) (a little over halfway down the page) than they are now, so maybe there's hope.

Judy, I believe she was referring to the DC area, not DC specifically. Most people that work in the DC area actually live in Virginia and Maryland. Northern Virginia (where many live that work in DC) has an unemployment rate of 5 right now and it is decreasing at this point. (It was 4.6 in January and rose to 5.5). http://www.vec.virginia.gov/pdf/newpres1.pdf

Also, many government jobs are located in Virginia (Pentagon is in Virginia, not DC).

[RaisingThemLeft]

Speaking of anecdotes, I have seen a lot more abuse of the unemployment system than I have ever witnessed of the welfare system. I never hear people complaining about unemployment cheats. I'm talking about the tradesmen who work seasonally and then take unemployment for the cold months. I'm talking about people who lose their jobs an then falsify job search records for months and months and months.



Yep, I know people who have a whole system around this. Then they collect unemployment and take non union side jobs under the table. My MIL used to do the same thing, working a temp position for 6 months, then collect unemployment for 6 months. She would continue this cycle the next year.

[RaisingThemLeft]

To answer the original question, about 7 years ago, we were on WIC and dh was on unemployment for about 2 months. I didn't feel at all guilty about it. I wasn't happy to be in that situation, but I didn't feel shame. We did what we needed to do to feed our family and keep a roof over our heads. You'd be surprised how much milk, eggs, cheese, and cereal help you when you are trying to live on unemployment. We basically lived on WIC food for a while there.

I think it's really sad when people's pride gets in the way of them applying for assistance when they really need it. When I was in high school, my history teacher showed us a video of poor people living in the south. I had no idea that people still lived like that today. I'm talking no electricy and having to haul in water in some cases. The parents all worked, but the jobs just didn't pay close to enough to live on. In one case, there was this pg lady, and all the family was eating was gravy. She'd make a little bit of it with grease and flour and they'd eat that, sometimes without even bread to go with it. Her baby ended up being stillborn. All of this was because she was too proud to collect welfare or food stamps.

[Tweet]

Probably not. But you would have two incomes so would you really qualify for child care and food stamps? I suppose with enough kids you may. Or if both mom and dad work min wage. IDK

There is also always 2nd or 3rd shifts so that no day care is needed. We have done this in the past. But that's not what you asked.


lol. Well, I'm glad that you think it's so super easy to get 2nd and 3rd shift jobs right now. It isn't. The only place that even has a second and third shift here is Walmart and right now they aren't hiring for either one. It might be different if there was factory work here .But,there isn't.

I actually think it would be great to qualify for some type of assistance if you are a SAHP.I'm not sure how I'd like to see that played out and which form it should take. i do think it's worth something,though. Iirc, I've read studies that showed it had clear benefits. out I disagree strongly that it is not work. It most certainly is. And it's odd to me that you used housecleaning as your example. first of all, that isn't all there is . Secondly, no, it's not always possible to do it when you're children are around. A lot of times i'm up until 2 or 3 getting it done and then starting my day at 6. It seems odd to me in a way that typical jobs offer monetary compensation,yet there isn't anything at all for a stay at home parent. I do think it benefits society,albeit in different ways.

Anyway, I'm not sure what types of incentives or assistance would be appropriate. It's just something that's always struck me as sort of odd.It's a pretty thankless job,actually.

[Candi]

lol. Well, I'm glad that you think it's so super easy to get 2nd and 3rd shift jobs right now. It isn't. The only place that even has a second and third shift here is Walmart and right now they aren't hiring for either one. It might be different if there was factory work here .But,there isn't.

I actually think it would be great to qualify for some type of assistance if you are a SAHP.I'm not sure how I'd like to see that played out and which form it should take. i do think it's worth something,though. Iirc, I've read studies that showed it had clear benefits. out I disagree strongly that it is not work. It most certainly is. And it's odd to me that you used housecleaning as your example. first of all, that isn't all there is . Secondly, no, it's not always possible to do it when you're children are around. A lot of times i'm up until 2 or 3 getting it done and then starting my day at 6. It seems odd to me in a way that typical jobs offer monetary compensation,yet there isn't anything at all for a stay at home parent. I do think it benefits society,albeit in different ways.

Anyway, I'm not sure what types of incentives or assistance would be appropriate. It's just something that's always struck me as sort of odd.It's a pretty thankless job,actually.


OK, well, I didn't mean to make it sound like it is super easy to get 2nd or 3rd shift. But I'm not surprised it came out that way. Where I live it is super easy. Lots of manufacturing jobs, and it is easy to get a temp 3rd shift job earning $10/hr.

I understand it is very hard to do housecleaning and watch the kids. I said housecleaning because she told me that is why she sends her kids to the daycare even though she doesn't work during the week. But to be even, me and DH (well until he was laid off a month ago) both work full time jobs and I have to clean while watching my kids who are desperate for my attention.

A couple years ago I got to SAH for about 6 months. I agree, very thankless. My DH was jealous. This time that it is his turn to be laid off, he can't wait to go back to work, LOL.

I agree that there is a benefit to SAHMs. But on the flip side, although I would love to SAH for my kids, I can't because we couldn't live on one salarly. Especially on just DH's salary because he pays child support on two other children. So I suppose I am jealous that some get to stay home and get government assistance but wouldn't get that assistance if they worked, KWIM?

[Tweet]

Well, I think it really is quite unfortunate that so many that need those type of programs can't get it.
And don't get me started on disability. I really,really could use it. However,with the way it's set up, I'm 2 work credits shy. I've got more than enough credits ,but just not in the time frame they have . And it's not like it was not that long prior to the cut off.

As for other assistance, yeah, it's hard when you over qualify yet can't even make ends meet. We're on one salary and did ok,and now DH is facing a 14/hr pay cut. We're going to be fucked 6 ways from Sunday,but he'll still make too much to qualify for anything.

All kinds of weird shit. One time,in another state, we were so bad off that we really needed food stamps. We qualified in every way except he had an old clinker work truck that he still had to make payments on. Since we had that, we couldn't get them.

[Justicedog]

Judy, I believe she was referring to the DC area, not DC specifically. Most people that work in the DC area actually live in Virginia and Maryland. Northern Virginia (where many live that work in DC) has an unemployment rate of 5 right now and it is decreasing at this point. (It was 4.6 in January and rose to 5.5). http://www.vec.virginia.gov/pdf/newpres1.pdf

Also, many government jobs are located in Virginia (Pentagon is in Virginia, not DC).


Right, the DC area is northern VA and Maryland. Summer unemployment rates were 9.6 for US, 7.4 MD and 6.9 for VA. The actual District of Columbia was higher than the national average.

[JudyJudyJudy]

When I was in high school, my history teacher showed us a video of poor people living in the south. I had no idea that people still lived like that today. I'm talking no electricy and having to haul in water in some cases. The parents all worked, but the jobs just didn't pay close to enough to live on. In one case, there was this pg lady, and all the family was eating was gravy. She'd make a little bit of it with grease and flour and they'd eat that, sometimes without even bread to go with it. Her baby ended up being stillborn. All of this was because she was too proud to collect welfare or food stamps.
I've known some of these people in real life. I've told about them on the board in the past, but I suspect people don't believe it.


OK, well, I didn't mean to make it sound like it is super easy to get 2nd or 3rd shift. But I'm not surprised it came out that way. Where I live it is super easy. Lots of manufacturing jobs, and it is easy to get a temp 3rd shift job earning $10/hr.
First, I'd love to know where all these manufacturing jobs are that are so plentiful right now. Second, if it's so easy to get such jobs, and you're so against any kind of assistance, then why isn't your husband working one of these jobs rather than getting an unemployment check? :confused:

[JudyJudyJudy]

Right, the DC area is northern VA and Maryland. Summer unemployment rates were 9.6 for US, 7.4 MD and 6.9 for VA. The actual District of Columbia was higher than the national average.
Gotcha. However, I don't think that job security is great with a 7+% unemployment rate.

[alejorge]

I recieve WIC, Foodstamps, and Medicaid. I am not ashamed at all that I recieve this help. I know that my DH has a good job but with the way the economy is right now he isn't working like he used to and we can feel the effects.

Last year at the same time we had made $5,000 more than we have this year and his pay rate is still the same. It is just getting harder for everyone right now.

If you have the option to get help then take it. It will be best for you and your family.

[tata]

Probably not. But you would have two incomes so would you really qualify for child care and food stamps? I suppose with enough kids you may. Or if both mom and dad work min wage. IDK

There is also always 2nd or 3rd shifts so that no day care is needed. We have done this in the past. But that's not what you asked.
Are you fucking kidding me? I have a damn college diploma and can't get much better than shoveling fries or pushing a mop and in case you weren't aware - those types of jobs pay beans.

So a second income in our case (and I suspect most cases) isn't going to amount to shit. For some people, the trade-off isn't worth it, especially if you still end up qualified to collect government assistance.

Now, mind you, our situation is exactly like that, but it has been in the past. I'm currently a measly step up from mop-pushing (I'm sending faxes and stuffing envelopes, tyvm) on a government stipend that allows me to work 15 hours per week for the University I attend. Thank goodness my husband works from home so that he can kick it with our toddler, 'cause otherwise I'd prolly decline the stipend and forgo day care 'cause frankly, I'd rather be $100 broker than I already am and get to hang with my Buddha.

I've known some of these people in real life. I've told about them on the board in the past, but I suspect people don't believe it.
While I believe you, I can understand why some might not. It's pretty unbelievable! :p

First, I'd love to know where all these manufacturing jobs are that are so plentiful right now. Second, if it's so easy to get such jobs, and you're so against any kind of assistance, then why isn't your husband working one of these jobs rather than getting an unemployment check? :confused:

Word.