Budget for fictional couple each making $15/hr.

[spdrun]

At $60k/yr for a couple years, it’s easier to floof your income enough to qualify for a loan on a condo. After one buys, then your suggestion might make sense.

[FlyerInHi]

Isn’t public assistance assets based? So if you have a 401k or savings you may not qualify.

You’re also giving up future career advancement. Plus with less total money, you’ll live in a lesser neighborhood and that will affect your kids.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=AN][quote=spdrun]True. BTW, not being judgmental, but you have to take it into account that not everyone wants to be on WIC or Medicaid.[/quote]Agree. The free money is there. It’s up to you whether you want to take it or not. You can always have both parents work @ $15/hr. Just saying you would come out ahead of you just have one parent stay at home.[/quote]AN, $15 hr FT (assuming the worker got a paid vacation and health benefits and so got paid for 52 weeks is $31,200 per year. There is no way those food programs you mention and Medi-Cal (which is horrible to have in comparison to an employer-paid healthplan or one off the exchange) are worth anything near $31,200. You’re also forgetting that the worker is adding quarters to their Social Security Account, may also be offered low-cost health and dental plans for their kids and may be eligible for a raise, bonus or both at the end of the year (or their rating period).

AN, do you actually know anyone on Medi-Cal and have you talked to them about their opinions on the quality of their healthcare lately … or lack thereof? I do, and I’m here to tell you that they’ll give you an earful on all that they have to go through in making an appt and showing up for a simple office call. That is … IF they can find a provider who will accept Medi-Cal. Do you have any idea how long Medi-Cal recipients have to wait for medically-necessary surgery? And how much groceries ($ amt per mo) do you think a family of four making $31,200 can get who qualifies for an EBT card? You DO KNOW that EBT cards pay for food only and zero household or personal items, right?

And I haven’t looked into the program lately, but aren’t WIC benefits limited to those who are currently pregnant and/or children under the age of 2 (or even younger)?

In addition, if the working parent making $31,200 per year was offered an “affordable” healthplan at work for he/she and their spouse/dependents, then this family would be automatically ineligible for Medi-Cal.

This “fictional” family grossing $62,400 yr likely also qualifies for the 6 to 6 program and DASH (afterschool programs subsidized by the school district) on a sliding scale of $37 – $45 wk for their first kid and $20 – $28 for their second kid (morning kinders slightly higher).

AN, I’m just curious so humor me here. If all you could make was $31,200 per year, would you want your spouse to stay at home if she had the training and license, etc to make a decent wage ($15 hr and up)? We’ll assume you are renting in SD (or living with relatives) because you couldn’t save anything for a downpayment on your own home with a $31,200 annual income and 2 kids.

Your mindset is precisely why the “Welfare Reform Act” of 1996 was created and enacted.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Responsibility_and_Work_Opportunity_Act

[spdrun]

FlyerInHI: I think that some is. But one of the criticisms of Obamacare was that it made Medicaid 100% income-based. Leading to absurd cases like the guy with a $5 million dollar house who was between businesses (new one was yet to show profit) being sent a Medicaid card.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Isn’t public assistance assets based? So if you have a 401k or savings you may not qualify…[/quote]

It is, FIH. See the link below as my reprinted income chart is not properly aligned. Our fictional family makes $31,200 yr with one 40-hr week, $15-hr worker. The income limits for Federal food aid for a family of four is $2584 mo gross or $31,008 yr. In addition, our fictional family doesn’t live on TANF, SSI or pensions so if their car is worth more than or their bank acct has more than $2,250, they’re SOL:

Resources

Households may have $2,250 in countable resources, such as a bank account, or $3,250 in countable resources if at least one person is age 60 or older, or is disabled. However, certain resources are NOT counted, such as a home and lot, the resources of people who receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI), the resources of people who receive Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF, formerly AFDC), and most retirement (pension) plans. The procedures for handling vehicles are determined at the state level. States have the option of substituting the vehicle rules used in their TANF assistance programs for SNAP vehicle rules when it results in a lower attribution of household assets. A number of States exclude the entire value of the household’s primary vehicle as an asset. In States that count the value of vehicles, the fair market value of each licensed vehicle that is not excluded is evaluated. Currently 39 States exclude the value of all vehicles entirely. 11 States totally exclude the value of at least one vehicle per household. The 3 remaining states exempt an amount higher than the SNAP’s standard auto exemption (currently set at $4,650) from the fair market value to determine the countable resource value of a vehicle. For more information concerning State specific vehicle policy, check with the State agency that administers the SNAP program.
Income

Households have to meet income tests unless all members are receiving TANF, SSI, or in some places general assistance. Most households must meet both the gross and net income tests, but a household with an elderly person or a person who is receiving certain types of disability payments only has to meet the net income test. Households, except those noted, that have income over the amounts listed below cannot get SNAP benefits.

(Oct. 1, 2014 through Sept. 30, 2015)

Household Size

Gross monthly income

(130 percent of poverty)

Net monthly income

(100 percent of poverty)

1
$1,265 $ 973

2
1,705 1,311

3
2,144 1,650

4
2,584 1,988

http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/eligibility

I forgot to mention that our fictional family’s two children are also eligible for .40 school lunches, thereby saving them money on food.

[spdrun]

Bearishgurl: I’d argue that the welfare reforms of 1996 did more harm than good, and actually risked trapping more people in poverty.

Take the case of someone with kids who wants to leave work to go to school full time. Between that and kids, they’d have a “full time job” on their hands.

The reform of 1996 limits their assistance to two years without a job, and places a lifetime limit of five years on total assistance. Barely enough time to get bachelor’s degree.

So more people who want to better themselves either end up sleeping four hours a night (more risk of health issues and dropping out) or end up up to their nipples in debt. Or they just skip the education and survive as best they can.

In the guise of taking “welfare queens” off the rolls, it essentially made having a family (especially as a single parent, even if not by choice) an educational dead end.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=spdrun]Bearishgurl: I’d argue that the welfare reforms of 1996 did more harm than good, and actually risked trapping more people in poverty.

Take the case of someone with kids who wants to leave work to go to school full time. Between that and kids, they’d have a “full time job” on their hands.

The reform of 1996 limits their assistance to two years without a job, and places a lifetime limit of five years on total assistance. Barely enough time to get bachelor’s degree.

So more people who want to better themselves either end up sleeping four hours a night (more risk of health issues and dropping out) or end up up to their nipples in debt. Or they just skip the education and survive as best they can.

In the guise of taking “welfare queens” off the rolls, it essentially made having a family (especially as a single parent, even if not by choice) an educational dead end.[/quote]

If my parents and my generation chose to have children first and then pursue a college degree (in that order), they took 3-6 credit hrs (1-2 classes) per semester at night and on Saturdays. Yes, it took 7-10 years that way, but eventually they got a degree with losing $1 of pay or benefits and were eligible and in line for whatever promotion they were aiming for while studying for the degree.

My stepfather (now deceased) joined Rockwell as a HS dropout after getting married at the age of 21. He and his spouse had three kids and he eventually received the title of “metallurgist” there through his work experience only. He divorced and married my mom, received his GED and began attending a local 4-yr college at night and some Saturdays and graduated ~5 yrs later with a degree in Geological Engineering (he was able to CLEP out of several GE’s and use his work experience for some credits). Of course, he was then promoted at work to an engineering position and worked in that position until retiring with 38 years of service and a very nice monthly pension.

Dozens of my own co-workers over the years actually got a 3-year LAW degree attending nights and weekends for ~5 yrs, studied hard during their one-hour lunches and hardly ever missed a day of work (except for vacations). 80% of them had minor kids at home.

That’s the way life is.

It’s not the taxpayers’ responsibility to pay for a college student’s living expense because the student chose to make important life decisions in a particular order.

[spdrun]

Public universities were cheaper then as compared to incomes. At least partially due to (zOMFG!) … taxpayer support.

Was your stepfather a single parent when he was going to school? Were your cow-orkers single parents, or did they have a spouse to share responsibilities with?

Also, during your stepfather’s time, it was easier to get a decent job without a college degree in the first place. He was probably a union factory worker at Rockwell, not a Mickey Dee’s fry cook.

[an]

BG, $31k before tax. How much would it be after tax? Then how much do you have to pay for child care for 2 kids? How much does diapers, baby food, etc. cost? How much does healthcare cost? Then there’s the intangible of having a parent raising the kid instead of a stranger. Have a parent there to tutor the kids after school when they’re older, making sure they’re well fed with home cooked meals, making sure they stay out of trouble. I think if you add all of that up, I would say it’s worth more than $31k.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=spdrun]FlyerInHI: I think that some is. But one of the criticisms of Obamacare was that it made Medicaid 100% income-based. Leading to absurd cases like the guy with a $5 million dollar house who was between businesses (new one was yet to show profit) being sent a Medicaid card.[/quote]

I think that you’re wrong about the Medicaid card. As far as I know medicaid is asset based.

Maybe he got an Obama care card.

Source?

[FlyerInHi]

I think there’s a stigma paying with foodtamps and getting free school lunches.
How would the kids feel?

[spdrun]

I think that you’re wrong about the Medicaid card. As far as I know medicaid is asset based.

Maybe he got an Obama care card.

There’s no such thing as an “Obama care card.” You either have a private insurance card for insurance bought through an exchange, or you have a Medicaid card below a certain % of Federal poverty level. It’s either 100% or a higher % depending on whether the state has expanded Medicaid.

There’s no asset test for any type of “Obamacare”, which is sort of the point.

[FlyerInHi]

That’s was my point spd. Maybe the millionaire got insurance through an exchange. But I doubt he has a state Medicaid card

[spdrun]

I can’t find the cite right now, but the website apparently told him that he was only eligible for insurance via Medicaid, due to his income being below x% of the Fed poverty level.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=spdrun]Public universities were cheaper then as compared to incomes. At least partially due to (zOMFG!) … taxpayer support.

Was your stepfather a single parent when he was going to school? Were your cow-orkers single parents, or did they have a spouse to share responsibilities with?

Also, during your stepfather’s time, it was easier to get a decent job without a college degree in the first place. He was probably a union factory worker at Rockwell, not a Mickey Dee’s fry cook.[/quote]

My stepfather’s ex-spouse always worked FT as well. At all times when he was a PT student, he was married and his kids were grown. My student-coworkers were all married and living with their spouses and kid(s) at the time of going to night school, IIRC. I was in the same situation (worked FT and lived with spouse and kids) while attending night classes at City and SW Colleges (local CC’s) for about ten years. I earned about 75-80 sem units but never graduated because I am still lacking 9 units GE credits (3 classes). My accounting classes were four units and I got home about 10:45 pm. My paralegal program was a one year program (500-level graduate course) two nights per week (got home at 10:30 pm) and every other Saturday (until about midnight). At the time of earning my paralegal certificate, I worked FT and had minor children at home. I had a sister (now deceased) who earned a BS in Accountancy and a Masters in Taxation, all while working FT (married, no kids at that time) and putting herself thru college. I have a brother who earned a double major (Voc Ag teaching credential and Meat Science) all while working FT (single, no kids at that time) and putting himself thru college.

My siblings and I NEVER borrowed one dime for school or even qualified for a grant then – grants were $2-$4K yr back then (mostly $2K “BEOG” grants) and in order to get one, the student literally had to be on “welfare.” I applied for one on my FAFSA as a senior in HS and my mom made $900 too much money that year for me to get it. I then went to work FT right out of HS and made too much money to qualify for the grant (but was able to pay rent on a nice apt and buy a nice car – all cash). So it wasn’t worth it anymore for me to try to qualify for a measly $2-$4K in college aid.

Yeah, college was cheaper and housing was cheaper back then but we didn’t get paid as much either. My brother and I didn’t make anywhere NEAR $15 hr (more like <$5 hr). People did what they had to do back then to get ahead in life. Accepting aid was frowned upon unless a parent couldn't feed their family. Even those parents temporarily down on their luck had their pride and so were embarrassed to apply for food stamps or stand in line for commodities. Public school students had different-colored daily lunch tickets (participants of the Free Lunch program at school) and had to stand in a different lunch line than the paying students. The “free lunch” kids were stigmatized. (I’m glad this problem was “fixed.”) There were way fewer programs available and the benefit amounts were much lower than they are today and as such, there was much less incentive to attempt to defraud the “system” which seemingly appears to be so attractive today. It seems that there’s been a sea change in people’s views of what it really means to be “poor” today in the US and a huge increase in an individual’s “sense of entitlement.”

[Author]

Posts