It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Maine Adds Work Requirement to Welfare Benefits

page: 1
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 09:43 PM
link   
The State of Maine has recently re-added a "work" requirement to be eligible for food stamps.

It seems this requirement has been "exempted" over the past few years because of a clause in the Federal law from 1996.

Maine has experienced a massive awe-inspiring drop in food stamp spending.

Other states might be doing the same.



As the economy improves, should states continue waivers that were enacted during the recession to allow healthy adults who are not working to get food stamps longer than the law’s time limit? Maine is one of the states that say no.

Last year, the administration of Gov. Paul R. LePage, a Republican, decided to reimpose a three-month limit (out of every three-year period) on food stamps for a group often known as Abawds — able-bodied adults without minor dependents — unless they work 20 hours per week, take state job-training courses or volunteer for about six hours per week. Maine, like other states, makes some exceptions.

“You’ve got to incentivize employment, create goals and create time limits on these welfare programs,” said Mary Mayhew, the commissioner of health and human services in Maine. She said the measure was in line with Mr. LePage’s efforts to reform welfare.



Maine Adds Work Requirement to Welfare Benefits, Drops 80% of Able-Bodied Childless Adults

linked NYTimes story....
States Tighten Conditions for Receiving Food Stamps as the Economy Improves

How Many

"Abawds" are Lurking

in the Shadows?







posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 09:53 PM
link   
X,

Please tell me why you think this wasn't tried a Long Damn time ago!!

If corporate AmeriKa hadn't sent all their factory machinery overseas ... there'd be enough work for everyone in this country.

Who wouldn't sit idly by, if they knew they could 'get paid' for doing nothing? And, making babies for a living is good work ... if you can get it.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 09:53 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen



unless they work 20 hours per week, take state job-training courses or volunteer for about six hours per week.


I completely agree with such a requirment. As far as volunteer work I am interested to see what would qualify I am hoping it would cover many areas.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 10:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
States Tighten Conditions for Receiving Food Stamps as the Economy Improves

First to admit that economics is one of those areas for me. It's up there with rocket science, quantum physics, and things George Clooney likes to do on Tuesday. I'm just not very educated in that area, but ...

From what I've been told its the improvement in economy, not the 'work for X' programs, that decrease unemployment.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 10:47 PM
link   
I live in Maine. Let me tell you, there aren't many jobs and there are even less year round jobs. Lepage has a vendetta against people who need assistance. The man is not fit to run a town let alone a state. For a self proclaimed man of the people, his policies are in direct opposition to that claim.




posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 10:53 PM
link   
I think the option to work 6 hours a week volunteering to get food stamps is too little. If working 20 hours per week is required, why only volunteer for 6 hours?

If a person can't find work, then "working" for food stamps by volunteering is quite a fair trade for the community who is paying for the food. That is not unreasonable at all, nor unfair, nor mean, in fact 6 hours is way too generous for someone who is unemployed and is able bodied.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 10:53 PM
link   
This is a step in the right direction.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 10:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: PorteurDeMort
I live in Maine. Let me tell you, there aren't many jobs and there are even less year round jobs. Lepage has a vendetta against people who need assistance. The man is not fit to run a town let alone a state. For a self proclaimed man of the people, his policies are in direct opposition to that claim.



And he's probably clamping down on corruption.

All these people have to do is volunteer some time for worthy causes like they themselves feel entitled to.

It's part of a Federal law signed by Clinton.

Getting a job is only one option.




posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 11:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: PorteurDeMort
I live in Maine. Let me tell you, there aren't many jobs and there are even less year round jobs. Lepage has a vendetta against people who need assistance. The man is not fit to run a town let alone a state. For a self proclaimed man of the people, his policies are in direct opposition to that claim.



And he's probably clamping down on corruption.

All these people have to do is volunteer some time for worthy causes like they themselves feel entitled to.

It's part of a Federal law signed by Clinton.

Getting a job is only one option.



He spent more taxpayer dollars investigating welfare fraud than he saved by cutting benefits. Over a two year span , of 3 million plus EBT transactions, he found just under 3,000 which he declared to be fraudulent. Or 1/10th of 1%. I don't receive any benefits myself but I have no qualms with some of my tax dollars going to help those who need it. I know plenty of people who work and receive benefits and still scrape by. Our economy in this state is horrible. He should focus on infrastructure and job creation, not targeting the poor.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: PorteurDeMort

If you read the NYTimes article linked in the OP, it refers to Federal money available for programs.

Maine might be getting the assistance.

But I do understand the concept of giving everybody needed assistance.

With all governments in debt, when will the bust happen? Then what happens to the failing assistance programs that never seem to solve the problems?




posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 11:48 PM
link   
If I needed foodstamps, I would do that to get the stamps. If a person is working twenty hours a week somewhere, they need not do anything else. A part time job anywhere also gives you a little money to help with the rent. If you are required to work six hours volunteering, you may need money to get there and back with.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 11:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: PorteurDeMort

If you read the NYTimes article linked in the OP, it refers to Federal money available for programs.

Maine might be getting the assistance.

But I do understand the concept of giving everybody needed assistance.

With all governments in debt, when will the bust happen? Then what happens to the failing assistance programs that never seem to solve the problems?




Here is the trap... WHY WORK when Welfare pays more than most entry level jobs in many States? Even more in the top states.

Welfare Payouts Top $20 Per Hour In Eight States
3m12dd41gw8bqlgg62dfsvyl.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com...
downtrend.com...


This study doesn’t take into account that not everyone on public assistance receives all of the programs. But if they did, their payout would be significantly higher than even a starting teacher’s salary in 11 states or a computer programmer in 3 states. The states with the highest welfare payouts – more than $20 per hour – are Hawaii, with payments equaling $29.13 per hour, DC at $24.43 per hour, Massachusetts at $24.30 , Connecticut at $21.33, New York at $21.01 per hour, New Jersey at $20.89 per hour, Rhode Island at $20.83 per hour and Vermont at $20.36 per hour.

edit on 19-4-2015 by infolurker because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 12:59 AM
link   
Hey man, welfare is never abused.

edit on 20-4-2015 by rockintitz because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 01:01 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker
Here is the trap- you pass this measure now and those with jobs, money, and stock market accounts, applaud.

Then you slowly raise the "volunteer" work hours while simultaneously destroying the economy. More and more people need assistance as the requirements to receive it increase.

End result: A nation of slaves.

ETA: A PLANET of slaves.




edit on 20-4-2015 by abe froman because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 01:09 AM
link   
a reply to: abe froman

I see you have a masters degree in "worst case scenario."

But if you are for government assistance, then you have to be familiar with government stipulations.

So which one are you for?



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 03:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: grandmakdw
I think the option to work 6 hours a week volunteering to get food stamps is too little. If working 20 hours per week is required, why only volunteer for 6 hours?

If a person can't find work, then "working" for food stamps by volunteering is quite a fair trade for the community who is paying for the food. That is not unreasonable at all, nor unfair, nor mean, in fact 6 hours is way too generous for someone who is unemployed and is able bodied.



Because if they can convince people to enslave themselves by working for nothing, those people don't compete for already paying jobs, putting others out of work.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 03:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Aazadanwhy would a company employ anyone, when you can get volunteers to work for free with no benefits sick days or holiday, but there's a hell of a lot of people who advocate this race to the bottom of employment rights, can't wait to drag us back 100years or so. It's great until they find themselves out of work doing voluntary night shifts with no protection

edit on 20-4-2015 by woodwardjnr because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 04:00 AM
link   
it's pretty much what they're aiming for with "WFTD" or Work for the Dole practices, you know what, it doesn't work, all it does is demoralise those out of work by turning them into slaves and eventually Costs people their jobs when it becomes widespread enough, why would someone pay an employee when they can take on a few "bludgers" using the WFTD scheme ?
The amount of money that is spent on controlling those on welfare could be spent in better ways, such as actual job creation. Instead of spending millions of dollars chasing thousands of dollars that May have potentially been wrongly paid to a "rorter" spend the money on infrastructure, then Employ those out of workers, provide useful training to them, as opposed to 20+hrs per week picking up rubbish Without pay, pay them a useful wage that will give them back their self esteem and hope instead of crushing it with enforced menial and/or demeaning tasks. There are far better solutions to the problems, long term and self sustainable solutions, not just self sustainable, but potentially profitable and expanding solutions.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 04:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: abe froman
a reply to: infolurker
Here is the trap- you pass this measure now and those with jobs, money, and stock market accounts, applaud.

Then you slowly raise the "volunteer" work hours while simultaneously destroying the economy. More and more people need assistance as the requirements to receive it increase.

End result: A nation of slaves.

ETA: A PLANET of slaves.








This is exactly what will happen...it is already in motion,slaves in prison are no longer enough they are looking for candidates on the outside...big money in slavery...



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 04:25 AM
link   
Oh here we go again. You can count on it every presidential election. Blame the poor. You know, if the poor and working poor could get a loan with practically 0% interest, maybe they could get momentum to get out of the cycle of enslavement.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join