Fairfax county pilot program to give 750 a month to low income families

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was on welfare after I left my former husband, and had two kids under three. An extra $750 a month would have been life changing.

Happy to report that like most welfare recipients, I was off the doles after a couple of years. I am all for this.

Great! You pay for it. Send your check to FFX county.

That’s not how taxes work. Taxpayers don’t get a line item veto. There are plenty of things I’d rather not spend public dollars on, but I still gladly pay my taxes because that’s how government works. Chalk it up as a cost of living in civil society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was on welfare after I left my former husband, and had two kids under three. An extra $750 a month would have been life changing.

Happy to report that like most welfare recipients, I was off the doles after a couple of years. I am all for this.

Great! You pay for it. Send your check to FFX county.

That’s not how taxes work. Taxpayers don’t get a line item veto. There are plenty of things I’d rather not spend public dollars on, but I still gladly pay my taxes because that’s how government works. Chalk it up as a cost of living in civil society.

+1

Do people get this up in arms about the billions of dollars of taxpayer money that go toward corporate subsidies? And the fact that major corporations take pains to avoid paying taxes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought we already learned the lesson that giving outright cash to people is a bad idea.

We learned the very opposite, and a academic research has confirmed it: giving money to people in poverty, relieves poverty. It’s just politically difficult because, as we see in this thread, conservatives -hate- giving money to people in poverty (tax breaks for rich people are just fine).

Poverty has existed for thousands of years and will continue to exist long after you and I are gone. I'm quite confident if something like this actually worked over the long run, we would have discovered so by now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was on welfare after I left my former husband, and had two kids under three. An extra $750 a month would have been life changing.

Happy to report that like most welfare recipients, I was off the doles after a couple of years. I am all for this.

Great! You pay for it. Send your check to FFX county.

That’s not how taxes work. Taxpayers don’t get a line item veto. There are plenty of things I’d rather not spend public dollars on, but I still gladly pay my taxes because that’s how government works. Chalk it up as a cost of living in civil society.

+1

Do people get this up in arms about the billions of dollars of taxpayer money that go toward corporate subsidies? And the fact that major corporations take pains to avoid paying taxes?

This is a local issue and an irresponsible waste of tax dollars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought we already learned the lesson that giving outright cash to people is a bad idea.

We learned the very opposite, and a academic research has confirmed it: giving money to people in poverty, relieves poverty. It’s just politically difficult because, as we see in this thread, conservatives -hate- giving money to people in poverty (tax breaks for rich people are just fine).

Poverty has existed for thousands of years and will continue to exist long after you and I are gone. I'm quite confident if something like this actually worked over the long run, we would have discovered so by now.

Exactly. I am so fed up with progressives that want to cherry pick some left leaning "academic research" as a way to spend other peoples money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was on welfare after I left my former husband, and had two kids under three. An extra $750 a month would have been life changing.

Happy to report that like most welfare recipients, I was off the doles after a couple of years. I am all for this.

Not in the DMV area - especially as you get closer into the City.

For example Alexandria City - multi generation families living in public housing and receiving welfare than moving to disability which is now defacto welfare. And of course DC where there are no actual welfare time limits thus you have kids born today who have parents, who live with grandparents and great grandparents - who all receive/received welfare.

The problem with these programs when done on a small scale is that once the help ends the person goes right back to where they were before AND the cost of living has gone up a little in that time and their wages didn’t AND they got used to spending more money. So now they have to adjust to slightly higher prices, stagnant wages, and suddenly and quickly adjust their budget. The basically get lifted up and crashed down.

Then if you expand these programs and continue them, someone has to pay and taxes go up. AND the middle class families can’t afford the increased taxes and their day to day living so they begin to search out new housing. As the middle class gets squeezed it leaves very wealthy and very poor and as this happens the very poor stay very poor because there is no where to go. They aren’t going to become very rich. And they can’t become middle class because there is no reasonable way to live on a middle class salary.

The better approach is to help families purchase housing. No it won’t be a house but there are plenty of condos that are available throughout the DMV area that are perfectly acceptable housing.

[Anonymous]

Give a man a fish vs teach them to fish.....

Why is it anyone's God given right to move to someone the wealthiest and most expensive areas of the country, have zero education, zero specialized skills, or zero useful anything, then complain about being poor and demanding they get to extract wealth from the area just because they exist?

I'm so sick and tired of the entitlement mentality from the left these days. They should just be honest and admit they to confiscate wealth and redistribute it for 'equity' purposes. Human beings will never, ever be equal, because some people are much smarter than others, some people will work a lot harder than others, other people will take on more risk than others to start a business. Why should the state redistribute wealth? People are never equal, and you don't deserve freebies just because you exist and breathe air. We will all be equal when we are all equally in the toilet and below mediocre while simultaneously destroying any motivation to create, innovate, and to work hard.

I'm sure handing out freebies helps with poverty. Handing out free cash also helps with inflation, gambling addictions, and idiots buying cars with $1000 per month payments too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Give a man a fish vs teach them to fish.....

Why is it anyone's God given right to move to someone the wealthiest and most expensive areas of the country, have zero education, zero specialized skills, or zero useful anything, then complain about being poor and demanding they get to extract wealth from the area just because they exist?

I'm so sick and tired of the entitlement mentality from the left these days. They should just be honest and admit they to confiscate wealth and redistribute it for 'equity' purposes. Human beings will never, ever be equal, because some people are much smarter than others, some people will work a lot harder than others, other people will take on more risk than others to start a business. Why should the state redistribute wealth? People are never equal, and you don't deserve freebies just because you exist and breathe air. We will all be equal when we are all equally in the toilet and below mediocre while simultaneously destroying any motivation to create, innovate, and to work hard.

I'm sure handing out freebies helps with poverty. Handing out free cash also helps with inflation, gambling addictions, and idiots buying cars with $1000 per month payments too.

+100!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This program seems like an old idea. I am not sure what the point is.

The point is helping people improve their lives.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-28/for-more-than-20-guaranteed-income-projects-the-data-is-in

It’s not scalable to everyone who would be eligible, and I’m not sure how fair it is to help some and not others. If we “help” everyone, then nobody is helped.

We can't help everyone, so we should help nobody...

The pilot programs are not scalable and are not designed to be scalable. They are designed to be pilot programs. The policies suggested by the results from the pilot programs certainly are scalable. What they probably aren't, is politically feasible. That's because we're a country where policies favored by large majorities of the population are somehow politically impossible to implement.

The reason these programs are “successful” for those in the programs is because the same money is not being extended to everyone else. If everyone were getting this money, then prices go up, and they are stuck competing with everyone for the same amount of housing and resources, just with more money in the mix. In the end, the ones who win are those who own the capital, just as it has always been.

So compare this those who have the benefits to WFH as a government employee against those employees who cannot. Those who can save on commute cost, eating out, childcare, etc, you are in effect getting free money from the government that others are not getting. But this is considered an essential good, because you are upper middle class women raising the next critical generation and this should be supported (really you mean subsidized) as much as possible. It is important that you can conveniently have two upper middle incomes to support thr lifestyle you want to have, and WFH makes that possible.

Wut

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Give a man a fish vs teach them to fish.....

Why is it anyone's God given right to move to someone the wealthiest and most expensive areas of the country, have zero education, zero specialized skills, or zero useful anything, then complain about being poor and demanding they get to extract wealth from the area just because they exist?

I'm so sick and tired of the entitlement mentality from the left these days. They should just be honest and admit they to confiscate wealth and redistribute it for 'equity' purposes. Human beings will never, ever be equal, because some people are much smarter than others, some people will work a lot harder than others, other people will take on more risk than others to start a business. Why should the state redistribute wealth? People are never equal, and you don't deserve freebies just because you exist and breathe air. We will all be equal when we are all equally in the toilet and below mediocre while simultaneously destroying any motivation to create, innovate, and to work hard.

I'm sure handing out freebies helps with poverty. Handing out free cash also helps with inflation, gambling addictions, and idiots buying cars with $1000 per month payments too.

Right?

I only make 100k but I want to live in Greenwich, CT. Someone should subsidize me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/news/fairfax-county-pilot-program-provide-2m-guaranteed-income-180-eligible-families

Not that 750 a month is a ton of money, but hasn’t this already been tried other places? Is it scalable?

The nature of this program is that it only works if kept small-scale and it only helps the families selected.

If the county decides to tout the results of this program as a win for equity and decides to implement it for all eligible families, then housing and prices will go up and we will be in the same situation we were already in, except now you have a new welfare dependent population.

The county would be better served by examining the policies that make life unaffordable here in the first place.

https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/neighborhood-community-services/economicmobilitypilot

more info. No in person interview. Participation not required in GMU study on what happens with unrestricted cash payments. Participation in financial counseling available but not required. So it's free money and a useless study will be done. 180 participants and data from the study could be used to justify program expansion.Who pays for this?

Taxpayers , covid cash, and might ask for donors [note indirect taxpayer]. No federal income tax due since "No. The financial assistance payments from this pilot are not included in gross income calculations and are not taxable due to being disaster COVID-19 relief." Open to non US citizens.

See, this is EXACTLY the bullsh_t democrats do that make their argument that they're not for open borders a complete farce. They give illegal immigrants drivers licenses. Then they give illegal immigrants the right to vote. Then they give them in state tuition at universities. Free health care, and now they want to give them free cash from the taxes paid by our citizens. Just open the borders to mass migration and have our citizens pay taxes to give out free cash handouts to the United Nations pouring in through our borders. What a brilliant plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was on welfare after I left my former husband, and had two kids under three. An extra $750 a month would have been life changing.

Happy to report that like most welfare recipients, I was off the doles after a couple of years. I am all for this.

Great! You pay for it. Send your check to FFX county.

That’s not how taxes work. Taxpayers don’t get a line item veto. There are plenty of things I’d rather not spend public dollars on, but I still gladly pay my taxes because that’s how government works. Chalk it up as a cost of living in civil society.

+1

Do people get this up in arms about the billions of dollars of taxpayer money that go toward corporate subsidies? And the fact that major corporations take pains to avoid paying taxes?

Yes. Yes I do. I also think this is a waste of funds on something that is unscalable, transient, and polarizing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Love how DCUM brings so many retrograde Reaganites out of the woodwork.

Cash transfers to low-income households are one of the best ways we have to fight poverty and improve the lives of the most vulnerable, especially children. Turns out giving money to impoverished people relieves poverty. What a concept!

Here’s one recent study finding that cash transfers are associated with reduced mortality among women and kids: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06116-2

Great! So tell us, where is the cash coming from? You? Me? All taxpayers? Do tell.

Yes, it’s coming from the taxpayers, including you and me. As well it should. Because decent people take care of others, especially those who are suffering. I seem to recall a whole testament being dedicated to someone who preached stories about that.

And I also recount many times roads have been paved to hell due to good intentions.

[Anonymous]

Just makes the place more attractive for people seeking handouts. Which will lead to more pressure on housing for the bottom quintile whether they are working people or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/news/fairfax-county-pilot-program-provide-2m-guaranteed-income-180-eligible-families

Not that 750 a month is a ton of money, but hasn’t this already been tried other places? Is it scalable?

The nature of this program is that it only works if kept small-scale and it only helps the families selected.

If the county decides to tout the results of this program as a win for equity and decides to implement it for all eligible families, then housing and prices will go up and we will be in the same situation we were already in, except now you have a new welfare dependent population.

The county would be better served by examining the policies that make life unaffordable here in the first place.

https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/neighborhood-community-services/economicmobilitypilot

more info. No in person interview. Participation not required in GMU study on what happens with unrestricted cash payments. Participation in financial counseling available but not required. So it's free money and a useless study will be done. 180 participants and data from the study could be used to justify program expansion.Who pays for this?

Taxpayers , covid cash, and might ask for donors [note indirect taxpayer]. No federal income tax due since "No. The financial assistance payments from this pilot are not included in gross income calculations and are not taxable due to being disaster COVID-19 relief." Open to non US citizens.

See, this is EXACTLY the bullsh_t democrats do that make their argument that they're not for open borders a complete farce. They give illegal immigrants drivers licenses. Then they give illegal immigrants the right to vote. Then they give them in state tuition at universities. Free health care, and now they want to give them free cash from the taxes paid by our citizens. Just open the borders to mass migration and have our citizens pay taxes to give out free cash handouts to the United Nations pouring in through our borders. What a brilliant plan.

+1