RFK Jr. and Dr. Oz are wrong. Work requirements don't work. They have little effect on labor force participation. They do work, if your goal is to make sure people can't get access to services because of administrative burdens. donmoynihan.substack.com/p/get-in-los... - ThreadSky

donmoyn.bsky.social • 18 days ago

RFK Jr. and Dr. Oz are wrong. Work requirements don't work. They have little effect on labor force participation. They do work, if your goal is to make sure people can't get access to services because of administrative burdens.
https://donmoynihan.substack.com/p/get-in-loserswe-are-tanking-the-us?utm_source=publication-search

Comments

dankeevy.bsky.social•18 days ago

But the point isn't a factual argument for work requirements, it's to muddy the water and cause confusion.

notlikewe.bsky.social•18 days ago

Personally I’m happy to pay for the laziest person in the country to have food, a place to sleep and healthcare as a small undesirable side effect if it means the vast, vast majority of people who are doing their best to get by also have that safety net.

kobayashimaruu.bsky.social•18 days ago

yup yup, it's always a boogeyman of "what if someone takes advantage of the system??" when that is such a teeny tiny non-issue in reality and it's only an excuse to keep people who need the help for real away.

duerpress.com•18 days ago

What you've described is the formula for a vibrant and productive economy.

And we certainly wouldn't want THAT.

themadge.bsky.social•17 days ago

My worldview is that I am okay with having a good policy that may be taken advantage of by some people and but consider crackdown on crime/immigration a failure and unacceptable if it results in the killing/arrest/deportation of innocent people; and the worldview of republicans is the opposite

marwood13.bsky.social•18 days ago

Idk, the laziest person in the world is definitely a rich man

tmoney2007.bsky.social•18 days ago

Hey, if EVERYBODY gets healthcare and housing and some rich person wants to live in government subsidized housing... I'm happy to do my part to pay for it.

I think it would probably be good for them to experience how a normal person lives.

conjurial.bsky.social•18 days ago

It's appropriate that he looks like he's hitting himself in the head here

grizheadhunter.bsky.social•18 days ago

Just reflects ALL TALK but no real SUBSTANCE. It perfectly defines maga

albertpylant.bsky.social•18 days ago

Of course that is what they are trying to do. These people are monsters!

infinitelyloopy.bsky.social•18 days ago

Which is their purpose. I don’t even think they try to hide this fact.

dysamoria.com•18 days ago

That’s the entire point of them: roadblocks to supporting people.

ltahab.bsky.social•18 days ago

If we're talking "work requirements" for healthcare, how about we first discuss the lifetime benefits our part-time employees in Congress get?

firstconsul.bsky.social•17 days ago

I suggest they meet the same requirements they require all the rest of us to meet for "work". They are, at best, a part-time Congress, and thus do not meet the requirements to receive benefits.

electricspacegirl.bsky.social•18 days ago

In 1996 I was 23 and my friend was a single mom of twin toddlers. She was forced off of welfare but couldn’t afford childcare so while she worked as a waitress ai babysat her kids for free. What was she going to do if she didn’t have anyone watch her kids while she started a new job?

mbridegam.bsky.social•18 days ago

Some of us are old enough to remember what the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 did to some of the specific people who it cut off benefits.

hunjun.bsky.social•18 days ago

Ask Bobbie if his aunt could have worked?

mikethemadbiol.bsky.social•18 days ago

📌

bschefke.bsky.social•18 days ago

This is one of the arguments that Matthew Desmond makes in Poverty, By America. Making access difficult is one of the ways that we choose to have a poverty class.

skyhog.bsky.social•18 days ago

And they also work great if the goal is to pay a giant consulting company more than you can realistically “save” in benefits to administer compliance.

coltranethedog.bsky.social•17 days ago

Younger, able-bodied people are not driving Medicaid's rising costs. Giving that cohort coverage is a rounding error compared to those aged 55-65, nursing home patients, labor and delivery, and severely disabled patients - all of whom keep their benefits under "work requirements."

khsinclair.bsky.social•18 days ago

How much money are "work requirements" expected to save? Isn't that the simple measure of how much pain they'll cause?

bunnyjadwiga.bsky.social•18 days ago

The thing is, especially with existing labor shortages complicated by DOGE cuts, they will end up *costing* extra money because the additional recordkeeping will have to be privatized, and those recordkeeping firms will charge vast sums per client and do lousy recordkeeping.

bunnyjadwiga.bsky.social•18 days ago

Yes, it will throw more people off of social services, but the savings per person dropped will be dwarfed by the contract costs for privatizing the tracking.

firstconsul.bsky.social•17 days ago

Don't forget a rise in crime. People are gonna do what they need to do in order to feed their family. Trade-offs, and all.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply