From: Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 22:22:40 -0800 (PST)
To: Jeff Ubois <jubois@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Culling the proles with crypto anarchy
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19961203024102.008bd390@netcom.com>
Message-ID: <32A517F0.486B@gte.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Jeff Ubois wrote:
> The numbers quoted in the press were based on a study by the Cato Institute,
> "The Work Welfare Trade-Off: An Analysis of the Total Level of Welfare
> Benefits by the State" by Michael Tanner, Stephen Moore, and David Hartman,
> September, 1995.  It's at
> * To match the value of welfare benefits, a mother with two children would
> have to earn as much as $36,400 in Hawaii or as little as $11,500 in
> Mississippi.
> * Welfare benefits are especially generous in large cities. Welfare
> provides the equivalent of an hourly pretax wage of $14.75 in New York
> City, $12.45 in Philadelphia, $11.35 in Baltimore, and $10.90 in Detroit.

[snip]

Why bother with theory?  By January sometime, I ought to have my own
personal set of numbers finalized. My mate and I are caring for three
orphaned children, we both work (good paying corporate jobs), yet it
appears we'll be collecting at least $1400 per month tax-free for the
kiddies, from various agencies, not including medical/dental benefits.

I'd guess the medical/dental will be worth $300, so $1700 divided by
172.5 (or 173.33) work hours is $9.80 to $9.85 per hour after taxes.
Imagine what it would be if we were also collecting for the grownups.

This is in the greater L.A. area.  It looks like the bigger the family,
i.e., the more dependents, the bigger the income.  Does this hold true
elsewhere?