Safe Mode: On
The Head Of A Household Of Four Making Minimum Wage Has More Disposable Income Than A Family Making $60,000 A Year

Tonight's stunning financial piece de resistance comes from
Wyatt Emerich of The Cleveland Current. In what is sure to inspire some
serious ire among all those who once believed Ronald Reagan that it was
the USSR that was the "Evil Empire", Emmerich analyzes
disposable income and economic benefits among several key income classes
and comes to the stunning (and verifiable) conclusion that "a
one-parent family of three making $14,500 a year (minimum wage) has more
disposable income than a family making $60,000 a year." And that
excludes benefits from Supplemental Security Income disability checks.
America is now a country which punishes those middle-class people who
not only try to work hard, but avoid scamming the system. Not
surprisingly, it is not only the richest and most audacious thieves that
prosper - it is also the penny scammers at the very bottom of the
economic ladder that rip off the middle class each and every day,
courtesy of the world's most generous entitlement system. Perhaps if
Reagan were alive today, he would wish to modify the object of his once
legendary remark.



Stunning? Just do it yourself.








Almost all welfare programs have Web sites where you can call up
"benefits calculators." Just plug in your income and family size and,
presto, your benefits are automatically calculated.
The chart is quite revealing. A one-parent family of three
making $14,500 a year (minimu wage) has more disposable income than a
amily making $60,000 a year.

And if that wasn't enough, here is one that will blow your mind:








If the family provider works only one week a month at minimum wage,
he or she makes 92 percent as much as a provider grossing $60,000 a
year.

Ever wonder why Obama was so focused on health reform? It is so those
who have no interest or ability in working, make as much as
representatives of America's once exalted, and now merely endangered,
middle class.






First of all, working one week a month, saves big-time on child care.
But the real big-ticket item is Medicaid, which has minimal deductibles
and copays. By working only one week a month at a minimum wage job, a
provider is able to get total medical coverage for next to nothing.
Compare this to the family provider making $60,000 a year. A typical
Mississippi family coverage would cost around $12,000, adding
deductibles and copays adds an additional $4,500 or so to the bill.
That's a huge hit.

There is a reason why a full time worker may not be too excited to learn there is little to show for doing the "right thing."








The full-time $60,000-a-year job is going to be much more demanding
than woring one week a month at minimu wage. Presumably, the low-income
parent will have more energy to attend to the various stresses of
managing a household.

It gets even scarier if one assumes a little dishonesty is throwin in the equation.








If the one-week-a-month worker maintains an unreported cash-only job on the side, the deal gets better than a regular $60,000-a-year job.
In this scenario, you maintain a reportable, payroll deductible,
low-income job for federal tax purposes. This allows you to easily
establish your qualification for all these welfare programs. Then your
black-market job gives you additional cash without interfering with your
benefits. Some economists estimate there is one trillion in unreported
income each year in the United States.
This really got me thinking. Just how much money could I get if I set out to deliberately scam the system?
I soon realized that getting a low-paying minimum wage job would set
the stage for far more welfare benefits than you could earn in a real
job, if you were weilling to cheat. Even if you dodn't cheat,
you could do almost as well working one week a month at minimum wage
than busting a gut at a $60,000-a-year job.

Now where it gets plainly out of control is if one throws in Supplemental Security Income.








SSI pays $8,088 per year for each "disabled" family member. A person
can be deemed "disabled" if thy are totally lacking in the cultural and
educational skills needed to be employable in the workforce.
If you add $24,262 a year for three disability checks, the
lowest paid welfare family would now have far more take-home income than
the $60,000-a-year family.

Best of all: being on welfare does not judge you if you are stupid enough not to take drugs all day, every day to make some sense out of this Mephistophelian tragicomedy known as living in the USA:








Most private workplaces require drug testing, but there is no drug testing to get welfare checks.



Alas, on America's way to to communist welfare, it has long since surpassed such bastions of capitalism as China:








The welfare system in communist China is far stringier. Those people have to work to eat.



We have been writing for over a year, how the very top of America's
social order steals from the middle class each and every day. Now we
finally know that the very bottom of the entitlement food chain also
makes out like a bandit compared to that idiot American who actually
works and pays their taxes. One can only also hope that in addition to
seeing their disposable income be eaten away by a kleptocratic
entitlement state, that the disappearing middle class is also selling
off its weaponry. Because if it isn't, and if it finally decides it has
had enough, the outcome will not be surprising at all: it will be the
same old that has occurred in virtually every revolution in the history
of the world to date.



http://www.zerohedge.com/article/entitlement-america-head-household-making-minimum-wage-has-more-disposable-income-family-mak





Added: Jan-25-2012 Occurred On: Jan-25-2012
By: _Byron_
In:
Politics
Tags: The Head Of A Household Of Four Making Minimum Wage Has More Disposable Income Than A Family Making $60, 000 A Year
Views: 6837 | Comments: 64 | Votes: 3 | Favorites: 2 | Shared: 3 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 2
You need to be registered in order to add comments! Register HERE
Sort by: Newest first | Oldest first | Highest score first
Liveleak opposes racial slurs - if you do spot comments that fall into this category, please report them for us to review.
  • The middle/working classes work the hardest yet they get treated like dirt, this is the way elitists want it and I'm sure it will continue with Obama or Romney in charge.

    Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

    (4) | Report

    • @werdum12 the cost of middle-class services are what makes america broke...you dont see fancy stuff in poor area's only the middle-class area's....
      dollar for federal dollar middle-class get the most!

      Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

      (-6) | Report

    • Comment of user 'PimeTaradox' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • @wotan14 Why is it I drive a shittier car than most people on welfare. Ever drive by the projects and see what people have? And why should people on welfare be entitled to the amenities other work hard for. I say do away with welfare and let nature run it's course.

      Posted Apr-17-2014 By 

      (0) | Report

  • lol. What this article forgot to include is commentary from those who make $14k a year and how great their life is.

    Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

    (3) | Report

  • Don't blame the poor! what the fuck, you think we don't want out of this hell hole? SCUM BAG! I WENT FROM MAKING 30K A YEAR TO BEING LAID OFF! AND FROM THERE I WENT TO UNEMPLOYMENT AND FROM UNEMPLOYMENT I WENT TO FORCEFULLY HAVING TO TAKE A PART TIME JOB THAT ONLY GIVES 26 HOURS A WEEK. WITH HUNDREDS OF APPLICATIONS OUT THERE AN NO ONE CALLING YOU TELL ME WTF AM I SUPPOSE TO DO NOW? AT 30K A YEAR I WAS PAYING MY OWN HEALTHCARE, NOT ON FOODSTAMPS AND WAS LIVING MY LIFE!. THAT NOW IS ALL GONE! AND More..

    Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

    (3) | Report

    • @virtualdesires well, you wrote all in caps, so you must be serious

      Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @_Byron_

      On this issue I agree 100%. These people game the system and it should be stopped dead.

      Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

      (-1) | Report

    • @virtualdesires .. what does forcefully having to take a part time job mean ?? do you mean you had to work a bad paying job because the goverment cheese was running out ?

      Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @virtualdesires Develop some type of marketable skill. There's a surplus of caps lock hotheads assessing blame, no one needs any more of those. Try being a problem solver instead.

      And yes, I labor for a living.

      Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @dcmfox They make up an almost insignificant fraction of the recipients. Demonizing all of the programs for the fraud of a few is like killing every kitten in the city with a flame thrower because a lion escaped from the zoo. Byron is an idiot.

      Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

      (2) | Report

  • The moochers need to be cut off. You don't work you don't eat.

    Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • The problem with this system of handouts is the problem we see today: a government plunged into debt as it tries to shovel "money" to projects and programs while exceeding its tax income by a considerable margin; meanwhile as the government flails its arms around like a loon because of the economic troubles we push policies that only healthy economies can support (i.e. health care and green initiatives) while increasing the size of these social-benefit programs. In short these programs More..

    Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • It all depends, you really do have to look at each situation. In one I was the supervisor, working crazy hours, but a helper that reported to me made almost the same take home.

    Worst yet he had a race advantage that meant he actually got more, even though I worked 3X the hours.

    Better to die living than die paying taxes.

    Darcy taught me that, RIP.

    Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

    • @Jb0713 You know statistically speaking most non-white races make less than their white counterparts with the same credentials and jobs. It goes both ways.

      Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @BigDaddyHarrison Not so much in parts of Canada. There it only goes one way and that is by law. South Africa based their system on ours because in part, it very clearly divided people by race.

      Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @Jb0713 I wouldn't really know about Canadian statistics. My Puerta Rican girlfriend qualifies for two scholarships that I do not because of her ethnicity. She is, however, unlike myself, a first generation college student so I think the government helping her attain higher education is a good thing to help break the cycle of menial jobs and poverty that her family has endured. She works very hard and deserves every scholarship she gets.

      Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @BigDaddyHarrison The idea that the discrimination is helping, rather than hurting the recipient is often used to defend legislated racial discrimination in Canada.

      Of course it has to ignore that someone else was negatively discriminated against based on their race or accept the idea that racial discrimination against people is acceptable, even desirable.

      I think the only position that can be defended on moral grounds is the one that argues against racial discrimination and sees people for More..

      Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @Jb0713 The idea also ignored the fact that implicit biases and cultural problems that stem from our nation being one of apartheid and segregation only 60 some years ago still impedes many Americans from reaching their full potential.

      It's proven statistically that black men are only as likely as white ex-convicts to get a job callback.

      Posted Jan-30-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • Comment of user 'firetatoo' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • This is what Obama would call "A Fair Share"

    Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Ron Paul 2012!

    Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Comment of user 'Zardoz003' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • @Zardoz003

      But this kind of stuff keeps them going each day. Why accept reality when you can just wallow in the lunatic fantasies of the paranoid right wing?

      Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • Some say that welfare went away. It just sprouted back up in a multiplicity of programs. For us wage and salary workers, paying for the lazys to drink beer on our dime just to wait fo da check, is a rotten deal.

    Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • what a crock

    Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Some pretty tricky accounting there.

    For the person making 14,500, their actual disposable income is 7970. That is their earnings plus the tax credit, minus taxes and child care costs. All those other items they added are not "income", they are programs that pay the costs of certain things. The person making 60,000 is left with 34,366 after taxes and child care costs, but that person actually has the cash in his/her pocket and gets to choose how to spend it.

    That's the differenc More..

    Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • This is why i chose not to have kids.

    Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Pure Socialism was the hallmark of the USSR, so it's no leap to think that the socialist/entitlement society that now permeates the USA is also an evil empire.

    Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Title isn't accurate. Food Stamps, school lunch program, and housing subsidies do not count as "disposable income." It also fails to take into consideration taxes other than payroll and income. It also assumes that you will be eligible for medicaid, which also is not disposable income.

    While the overall point is clear, it assumes too much.

    Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • haha, fucking show me this rich poor guy lol

    Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • I see that this is very inaccurate. But what if it wasn't? Does the middle class feel cheated? I got an idea for you! Quit your dumb ass high paying job and work one week a month and live like a king! If you feel mad about about doing more work for the same payoff, aren't you really just mad at yourself? Don't you just feel stupid taking the hard road when the easy road is just there waiting to be taken? Oh, you got your pride? Is that it? Well, working 4 times as much at a harder job is the pri More..

    Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Comment of user 'rclark951' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/25/1058470/-Now-Mitt-Romney-claims-he-actually-pays-a-50-tax-rate?via=blog_1

    My god... he keeps lying, and you people keep swallowing his steaming bullshit and smiling, asking for seconds.

    Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

    (-1) | Report

  • WTF is this bullshit? It rounds it up by saying that people are disabled and receive 8,000 each. Facts to back that up? None!

    Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

    (-2) | Report

    • @BigDaddyHarrison I posted the link, follow it you lazy bastard

      Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

      (5) | Report

    • @BigDaddyHarrison You just got owned by Byron_!

      Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

      (2) | Report

    • @_Byron_ To back up this claim, Emmerich provided a chart ostensibly based on the numbers he’d uncovered during his online tinkering:

      I sent the chart to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, and its researchers replied with a lengthy dossier of the chart’s errors. For starters, Emmerich overestimated the federal tax liability of the $60,000 family by failing to distinguish between gross and taxable income (the $60,000 family only has $40,400 in taxable income, according to the CBPP) More..

      Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @xenocidal Yeah, except his entire article was based on bullshit.

      Here's the link for someone who actually decided to fact check this crap.

      http://www.tnr.com/article/82962/conservatives-economic-chart-fox-de-rugy

      Posted Jan-26-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

  • The lies republicans will come up with to attack the poor are just mindblowing. Sad too.

    I'd like you to show me ONE poor person collecting all these benefits you've listed. Not a statistic, a name.

    Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

    (-2) | Report

    • @hellgremlin lies? What lies and no one is attacking the poor. We're attacking a system that steals from the middle class to subsidize poverty and incompetence.

      Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

      (5) | Report

    • @hellgremlin I don't associate with the moocher class so I don't stop to learn their names. I usually see them in the paper though under weekly arrests.

      Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

      (4) | Report

    • @_Byron_ Hmm... a system that steals from the middle class to subsidize poverty and incompetence...

      So, Bain Capital? :)

      Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

      (-3) | Report

    • @hellgremlin
      You should hire Bain Capital to fire you for your incompetent silly comments. They know how to turn things around and be profitable and make sense.

      Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @SOONER3 Hallowed is the profit! All must bow before the sacred profit!

      Say, how do you think the economy was affected by Bain's hostile takeovers and firing of thousands of people?

      Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

      (-1) | Report

  • Also a majority of the poor don't even receive 1/3rd of the benefits being calculated.

    http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1302

    http://www.anitra.net/homelessness/columns/anitra/eightmyths.html

    Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

    (-3) | Report

    • @BigDaddyHarrison

      your links are bullshit, lying liberal propaganda.

      48 Million Americans on Foodstamps
      45 Million Americans on SNAP
      38 Million kids on National School Lunch Program
      3.1 Million Americans on Section 8


      http://www.dailyjobsupdate.com/wp-content/uploads/Food-Stamps-Monthly.jpg

      http://www.snaptohealth.org/snap/snap-frequently-asked-questions/

      http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/lunch/AboutLunch/ProgramHistory_7.htm

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_8_%28housing%29

      Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

      (4) | Report

    • @BigDaddyHarrison This is true. It depends on what state you live in. A single white male like myself cannot receive any of these except earned income tax credit. Who the fuck gets 6k a year in food stamps? Never heard of that. Most people i know with one child receiving SNAP get around 148$ a month.

      Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • add up all the costs to bring services to red-states they are the welfare states dollar for dollar blue-progressive states pay taxes while red-states leach-
      to bring service and goods to a red-stater is extremely high-blue-states pay for red-states that is a matter of fact-google red-states welfare states...
      federal dollars spent on red-state losers like yourself costs more then food-stamps welfare and-all poor people programs combined!
      "google red-states welfare states"
      i dare you to More..

      Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

      (-1) | Report

    • @_Byron_

      But his facts still stand. While were at record highs of applicants many still get denied and have for years now.

      BTW your "numbers" also include war veterans beginning with the original Gulf war up until recent Iraq and Afghanistan. Something Wikiepedia doesn't tell you. But yeah, let's deny help for them too Yeeeehaaaw!

      Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

      (-1) | Report

    • @BigDaddyHarrison Owned again! Damn son, just stop, lol.

      Posted Jan-25-2012 By 

      (2) | Report