Bouncing Back: The Role of Social Safety Nets | Intellections

Social safety nets exist to help those who have fallen on hard times. However, when poorly designed they can lead to long-term dependence. It is crucial to design social safety nets to encourage people to transition from government assistance back into the workforce.
For more information, please visit the Policyed page here: www.policyed.org/intellection....
Additional resources:
“The Great U.K. Depression: A Puzzle and Possible Resolution” by Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian to learn more about the United Kingdom’s experience after WWI due to poorly designed social safety nets. bit.ly/2uKTLUL

[@JC_PNG]

Thank you for not making it a 10-minute video on the role of social safety nets.

[@GeonQuuin]

I've seen adverts from this channel for a while now but even to this day, I'm still not sure whether it's a left or right leaning goup

[@alexshapardanis1105]

Right

[@crnkmnky]

I don't think it's healthy to look at life as being "to the left or right." But I agree it is important to know the nature of a source's agenda: "The Hoover Institution is a unit of Stanford University, but has its own board of overseers. Its basic tenets: representative government, private enterprise, peace, personal freedom, and the safeguards of the American system. It was founded in 1919 by Republican Herbert Hoover."

[@johnwalker5614]

I agree. The political spectrum, in the US at least, has been simplified to the 'left and right.' I think it's worth to see every issue individually and not generalize one entity as right- or left-leaning.

[@juliathiessen7350]

Seeing the goal of the safety net to "quickly move from temporary gov't assistance back to full time employment" is definitely a more right-wing pro-capitalist perspective. Socialists would not see government support as a problem that needs to be solved ASAP.

[@Fehzor]

What happens when the workforce isn't large enough to accommodate everyone's interests?

[@bubblegumgun3292]

then the ponzy scheme called "safety net" blows up in everyone faces

[@Code_Dee]

If you don't want people to starve to death you can do two things, 1. Have a robust welfare state. 2. Have a federal jobs program that ensures the gov't will be the employer of last resort. Conservatives support neither of these things, so when a plant decides to automate it's systems and kill thousands of jobs, conservatives have no answer. Nor do conservatives support unions, which are key to making sure workers have a livable wage. A lot of people who work full-time still have to use assistance to get by because wages are so low; we subsidize Walmart over 6 billion dollars a year in welfare because they won't pay their employees a livable wage. Walmart is not some struggling small business you know - their CEOs like get paid millions of dollars a year - they can afford to pay more than 7.50 an hour but choose not to, so the taxpayers foot the bill in the form of food stamps to be sure Walmart employees don't starve to death.

[@Code_Dee]

www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/04/15/report-walmart-workers-cost-taxpayers-6-2-billion-in-public-assistance/#451adc27720b

[@puppetsock]

Your post is pretty much an archetypal example of a false dichotomy. There are lots of other choices. For example, there's private charity.

[@mchristr]

What percentage of people in America are so mentally incompetent or physically incapacitated to the point they aren't able to care for themselves? Certainly the number has to be far less than one percent. Those have need of a safety net (preferably provided by the private sector) and I'm happy to contribute toward it. Everyone else needs something to do because work is a critical ingredient in producing mature people.

[@michaelgroesbeck8850]

Great video.

[@elizabethcartwright4673]

The subtle play to focus on the negative and not offer solutions is noticeable. The focus is on what happens when they're poorly designed and not how safety nets can be effective if properly designed. The ad is not solution focused; its problem focused. So less astute watchers will walk away with a negative, problem focused mindset. If the goal of this ad was to educate, then it would be solution focused and end with solution options.

[@youreallinsane]

-_____- it's not that benefits are "too good to leave", it's that poverty is too bad. Raise the federal minimum wage.

[@anewagora]

A wage is between the employer and the worker and nobody else. It's immoral to raise minimum wage. Nobody is entitled to the labor or services of another person, that would be slavery. And if a worker wants to work a job at a lower wage, it's a violation of their autonomy to forcibly interfere. The minimum wage doesn't just hurt the poorest workers. It hurts the poor business, and the poor customer. Raising the minimum wage- the money has to come from somewhere. Some employers will fire the weakest link and thus sacrifice the most vulnerable minority for the sake of the larger group. Others will cut hours. Either way the business will be less efficient for the same price. A wise business owner may distribute the cost of minimum wage increase over multiple areas. Instead of just cutting hours a lot, he might cut hours slightly, and then hold off on fixing equipment longer, tighten the budget on supplies, and raise prices. Therefore taking wages from the contractors and customers to give to the employees. The only reason minimum wage has been supported is because worker unions care about the strong worker being a part of the union to bully employers. They don't care about the vulnerable little guy. A worker union will benefit from min wage increases because the employers would become dependent on those unions. But the jobs that are monopolized by said unions are stagnant, wages are absurdly high, the prices are outrageous and they go out of business. Meanwhile, the people who want to work and get out of poverty have to volunteer first for $0 per hour when that volunteer position could have been paying them $2/hour, and maybe even give a raise to $4/hour until that person got a better job. The minimum wage hurts the poorest people. Not just the worker, but every individual in the low-resource economy. Coming in and trying to control their communities is ignorant, cruel, and immoral.

[@MrElionor]

+Nemo Sundry Ironically that argument can be used in support of slavery after all if a person wants to be a slave who are you to interfere with their autonomy?

[@gingerteddy618]

Slavery is owning a person as property and "forcing" the person to work. Employment is the person chooses to work on his own will and being paid for it.

[@Joee1530]

Ginger Teddy no minimum wage keeps people dependent and trapped in poverty.

[@michael-gr2uw]

If benefits outweigh working, that is the issue of jobs not paying enough. Besides, this video makes it sound like being poor is so great. People on benefits aren't doing well. They barely get by and have no money to spend or save. Getting on these benefits puts you in a place where you are broke and sometimes for life because it's hard to get out of it. Besides, there's nothing wrong with a system that gives you enough to not be desperate. It's called universal income. If you want more money then being broke, you work. But right now, there are very few incentives to work. Give people incentives and they will work. Removing safety nets aren't going to incentive people; It will just make them homeless. And this video portrays medicaid in a bad light, there are people that do work full time but still depend on Medicaid. Many workers aren't earning enough to be able to afford health insurance... and without Obamacares stipulations, they are screwed if they have a preexisting condition. The video makes it seem like the economy plays no roles in whether or not people work and just why some don't have jobs. Many don't have jobs because there aren't any or they aren't skilled enough or there are no incentives because a full time job earns you so little that you end up on government subsidies ANYWAY.

[@anewagora]

As you can see in the comments, diluting a message by supporting "safety nets" at all doesn't work to get most people to support the idea. The fact is, government safety nets are far worse than private charity, cooperative organizations and solidarity. Building sustainable interdependent community is about helping people take ownership of their lives and build a supportive network around themselves. This video attempts to suggest a safety net is different from the pit of getting stuck but the truth is, every safety net is a handicap on both society and the individual's autonomy.

[@collinleecrawford]

Yeah no the rest of the world was not getting wealthier for one there was Germany with a massive debt making its currency so inflated by 1936 1 million German dollars equaled 1 US dollar and there was also the Great Depression in the us I just wanted to point this out

[@ben8557]

First!

[@DefectoPerfect0]

it's not that benefits are "too good to leave", it's that poverty is too bad. Raise the federal minimum wage.

[@SuperNoobTroll]

Open borders or welfare state. Pick one.

[@Julian-rp4gc]

LMAO, propaganda for the oligarchs. Bernie 2020

[@ethanbill9224]

Bernie is an economic illiterate who duped college kids into giving him their money with visions of grandeur