Search This Blog

Translate

Blog Archive

Middleboro Review 2

NEW CONTENT MOVED TO MIDDLEBORO REVIEW 2

Toyota

Since the Dilly, Dally, Delay & Stall Law Firms are adding their billable hours, the Toyota U.S.A. and Route 44 Toyota posts have been separated here:

Route 44 Toyota Sold Me A Lemon



Showing posts with label EMPLOYMENT. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EMPLOYMENT. Show all posts

Sunday, January 19, 2020

What Happened When a State Made Food Stamps Harder to Get








In West Virginia, tougher work requirements for receiving food stamps complicated life for poor people, but did not result in increased employment.

By 
Jan. 13, 2020


MILTON, W.Va. — In the early mornings, Chastity and Paul Peyton walk from their small and barely heated apartment to Taco Bell to clean fryers and take orders for as many work hours as they can get. It rarely adds up to a full-time week’s worth, often not even close. With this income and whatever cash Mr. Peyton can scrape up doing odd jobs — which are hard to come by in a small town in winter, for someone without a car — the couple pays rent, utilities and his child support payments.
Then there is the matter of food.
“We can barely eat,” Ms. Peyton said. She was told she would be getting food stamps again soon — a little over two dollars’ worth a day — but the couple was without them for months. Sometimes they made too much money to qualify; sometimes it was a matter of working too little. There is nothing reliable but the local food pantry.
Four years ago, thousands of poor people here in Cabell County and eight other counties in West Virginia that were affected by a stat4 policy change found themselves having to prove that they were working or training for at least 20 hours a week in order to keep receiving food stamps consistently. In April, under a rule change by the Trump administration, people all over the country who are “able-bodied adults without dependents” will have to do the same.
The policy seems straightforward, but there is nothing straightforward about the reality of the working poor, a daily life of unreliable transportation, erratic work hours and capricious living arrangements.
The most visible impact has been at homeless missions and food pantries, which saw a big spike in demand that has never receded. But the policy change was barely noticeable in the work force, where evidence of some large influx of new workers is hard to discern. This reflects similar findings elsewhere, as states have steadily been reinstating work requirements in the years since the recession, when nearly the whole country waived them.
Since 1996, federal law has set a time limit on how long able-bodied adults could receive food stamps: no more than three months in a three-year period, if the recipient was not working or in training for at least 20 hours a week. But states have been able to waive those rules in lean times and in hurting areas; waivers are still in place in roughly one-third of the country.
Under the new rule from the Trump administration, most of these waivers will effectively be eliminated. By the administration’s own estimate, around 700,000 people will lose food stamps. Officials say that there are plenty of jobs waiting for them in the humming economy.

This was the thinking as West Virginia began lifting waivers four years ago, starting in the counties where unemployment rates were lowest.
One of the first signs of the change came in the dining hall of the Huntington City Mission, about half an hour’s drive from little Milton. Suddenly, the hall was packed.
“It was just like, ‘Boom, what’s going on here?’” said Mitch Webb, the director of the 81-year-old mission. In early 2016, the mission served an average of around 8,700 meals a month. After the new food stamp policy went into full effect, that jumped to over 12,300 meals a month. “It never renormalized,” Mr. Webb said.
That was true all around Huntington.
“A few years ago, at the first of the month we would be slow and toward the end of the months we would be busy,” said Diana Van Horn, who runs the food pantry at Trinity Episcopal Church. “Now we are busy all the time.”
Cynthia Kirkhart, who runs Facing Hunger, the main food bank in the region, said people started just showing up at the warehouse, asking if they were handing out food. There was no telling where else they were now turning. “People who are surviving do not approach the world the same way as people who are thriving,” she said.
That the number of people receiving food stamps would drop significantly was, of course, by design. The question was what would become of them.
According to the West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy, a research group that focuses heavily on social safety-net issues, there was no evidence of a big change in the job market. While around 5,410 people lost food stamps in the nine counties, the growth in the labor force in these counties over the ensuing three years significantly lagged the rest of the state. Average monthly employment growth in the counties actually slowed, while it nearly doubled in the rest of West Virginia.
“We can prove it from the data that this does not work,” said Seth DiStefano, policy outreach director at the center.
The state Department of Health and Human Resources initially acknowledged as much. “Our best data,” it reported in 2017, “does not indicate that the program has had a significant impact on employment figures.”

In an email message last week, a spokeswoman for the department said that the available data “does not paint a clear picture of the impact” of the changes on employment in the nine counties.
Delegate Tom Fast, a Republican lawmaker who sponsored a bill in 2018 that restored work requirements for food stamps statewide, said he considered the policy a success. “The information I have is that there’s been significant savings over all,” he said, coupling that with a low unemployment rate as evidence that the policy was working.
“If a person just chooses not to work, which those are the people that were targeted, they’re not going to get a free ride,” he said. Of people who are facing concrete obstacles to steady work, like a lack of transportation, he added: “If there’s a will, there’s a way.”

This is a popular sentiment, even among those who have had to rely on food stamps. The Peytons expressed little sympathy for people “just getting things handed to them.” At dinnertime at the city mission, men complained about people who were too lazy to work, who were sponging off the system.
“Not giving people food stamps because they don’t work is probably the best course of action,” said Zach Tate, who had been at the mission before, but now, with a place to stay, was just back for a meal. “It’s like training a puppy.”
He returned to his turkey Alfredo for a few moments and then clarified.
“But taking it away indefinitely doesn’t work either,” he said. “It creates a sense of despair.”
To move from talk of what is right policy to the reality of daily life is to enter a totally differet conversation, one about the never-ending logistics of poverty: the hunt for space in a small house with 10 other people, the ailing family members who are wholly dependent without technically being “dependents,” the tenuousness of recovery while living among addicts, the hopelessness of finding decent work with a felony record.
One man in Milton spoke of losing a job loading trucks when the employer looked up his bad credit report. A woman who lives some miles out in the country said it was nearly impossible to work as a waitress in a town when the last bus comes and goes at 7 p.m.
“You see people in these hills around here that can’t get out to a job because they have no vehicle,” said Jerome Comer, 47, who left rehab last year and is now working in the warehouse of Facing Hunger. “You say, ‘Well, they’re able-bodied Americans.’ Yeah, but they live 40 miles out in the holler. They can’t walk to McDonald’s.”

Mr. Comer had been raised by a disabled mother reliant on food stamps and had relied on government assistance himself when he was a younger man with a family, even though he was working two jobs. That is the thing: Most working-age adults on food stamps are either already working or are between jobs.





But the jobs are unstable and inconsistent — as in the Peytons’ case, paying too much to qualify for benefits one month, offering too few hours to qualify the next. That is the root of the problem, Mr. Comer said. But addressing it would be a lot more expensive than food stamps.
“If they could come up with a work program for these people to give them jobs and transportation and everything, I’d agree with that,” Mr. Comer went on. “If you’re an able-bodied American and you ain’t got a job and they’re going to give you one and give you the means to get back and forth to it, that’s great. But then what’s that going to cost you?”

















A version of this article appears in print on , Section A, Page 1 of the New York edition with the headline: Cuts to Food Stamps Squeeze West Virginia’s Working Poor.




















Thursday, December 26, 2019

Great Employment Numbers: 44% of Fully Employed Make $18,000 a Year or Less






THEREALNEWS.COM
Beneath the rosy employment report lives a reality of low-paying part-time and temporary work with no benefits or security.






Beneath the rosy employment report lives a reality of low-paying part-time and temporary work with no benefits or security.



Americans need to stop obsessing over the unemployment rate

By Gwynn Guilford 



On June 1, US president Donald Trump tweeted a barely veiled spoiler about soon-to-be-released employment data—violating presidential norms (and very possibly the law) in the process.
The president’s hint that the monthly job numbers would be upbeat seems to have moved markets. But there’s something even more troubling than Trump’s personal disdain for rules, according to Jeffrey Snider of Alhambra Partners.
According to the latest jobs data, the steadily declining unemployment rate is down to just 3.8%. But that sunny statistic belies a deeper infirmity in the labor market, Snider argues on his blog. Namely, working-age Americans have been giving up on finding jobs.
The public typically perceives a low unemployment rate as reassuring because it suggests that everyone who wants a job has one. But the broader set of jobs data suggests that’s not the case. ”As usual, the consequences of truly no growth in the labor market leaves particularly politicians to emphasize nothing other than the unemployment rate,” Snider says.
Trump himself used to complain about just this issue. Bashing the official unemployment stat was one of his bigger campaign trail themes. Back in June 2015, he made this remark about the official unemployment rate (which was then 5.5%): “Our labor participation rate was the worst since 1978…. Our real unemployment is anywhere from 18 to 20%. Don’t believe the 5.6. Don’t believe it. That’s right. A lot of people out there can’t get jobs.” And in May 2016: ”You hear a 5% unemployment rate. It’s such a phony number. That number was put in for presidents and for politicians so that they look good to the people.” A month after his victory in the US presidential elections, he was still sticking to his guns: “The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction.”
Given this history, Snider suggests, Trump should know better than to tout the latest unemployment numbers. To understand the problem, it helps to explain how the US government measures the health of its workforce.
The official labor force is made up of two types of people—those with jobs, obviously, but also the “unemployed,” defined as those ready to work who have actively looked for a job in the last four weeks.
The unemployment rate captures the number of unemployed people as a share of the labor force. But it doesn’t tell you anything about people who stopped looking for work a month ago or more. This group has effectively dropped out of the labor force.
So when the unemployment rate is falling, it could be for two reasons (or, more likely a combination of both). More people could be getting hired. Or more people might be giving up on trying to find work.
When politicians, pundits, and the press hail a low, steadily declining unemployment rate, they’re assuming that the first phenomenon—formerly unemployed people finding jobs—is driving that decline. But Snider points out if employers were actually on a hiring spree, we might expect a steady, sharp rise in the ranks of people working or actively looking for work, relative to the numbers of those who have left the labor force altogether. ”If the jobs market was truly a strong one currently, there would be a clear rush of those not in the labor force to join it,” he says. “Those millions right now outside the official numbers would be moving back into them if they were given a legitimate shot at fruitful employment.”
That’s clearly not happening. Despite the rumored labor shortage that the media’s been hyping, the share of working-age Americans who have jobs or are trying to get them continues to slip. The labor force participation rate—the share of the civilian population ages 16 and older that is working or looking for work—dropped again in May. Now only 62.7% of people in that group have jobs or are actively trying to find one. (That’s about the same as in the late 1970s, before women joined the workforce en masse.)
That’s not just because America’s workforce is getting older. Despite this being the longest US economic expansion on record, a smaller share of workers aged 20 to 54 are currently in the workforce than when the last recession began, in Dec. 2007.
Another sign of slack in labor market comes from wages. If hiring is getting harder, as the ultra-low unemployment rate implies, then employers should have to pay higher wages to attract candidates. That had been happening. But since late 2016, the pace of wage growth has flattened, as Dean Baker, head economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, flags.
It’s not clear why American adults are dropping out of the workforce, but it suggests social and economic ruptures of an alarming scale. Even more alarming still is the fact that those with power and influence still deny the problem, exalting 3.8% unemployment as proof that regular Americans are doing just fine.
Trump used to be one of the few exceptionswhich was why, despite his many flaws, some saw his presidency as offering hope for middle America. Not anymore. As Snider puts it, “The one guy who was finally willing to be honest about the state of American labor appears to have become just as conventional as the all the rest.”



What Is the REAL National U.S. Unemployment Rate – Why the Numbers Can Be Misleading

The unemployment rate is a variable that economists routinely use to measure the health of the economy.
However, some people think the federal unemployment rate doesn’t accurately reflect reality. In fact, the real rate of unemployment may actually be much higher than what’s reported.
The state and federal governments calculate unemployment differently. States often measure unemployment by the number of people receiving unemployment benefits. But that, of course, can be misleading since unemployment benefits expire, leaving the unemployed without a way to be measured.
The federal U.S. government, which releases the ubiquitous “unemployment rate” our country focuses on, uses a calculation to measure how many people are unemployed, though this measurement is also flawed.

How Is the Unemployment Rate Calculated?

Surveyors from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) visit 60,000 households every month and ask a number of questions to determine someone’s employment status. If someone works full-time, part-time, or is self-employed, they are considered employed. If someone does not have a job of any kind, but has been looking for one for the past four weeks, they are considered unemployed. If someone does not have a job and isn’t looking for one, they are considered outside of the labor force.
The rate is then calculated as the number of people who are actively looking for jobs (i.e. the “unemployed”) divided by the number of people who have jobs plus those actively looking (i.e. the “labor force”). Anyone who is not looking is not considered part of the calculation.
For example, let’s say the BLS conducts a survey of 60,000 households that yields 110,000 respondents. In their survey, they find the following results:
  • Of those respondents, 60,000 have jobs. They either work for an employer or have their own business.
  • Another 10,000 say they are looking for work.
  • The remaining 40,000 are not considered part of the labor force. They may be going back to school, disabled and unable to work, or perhaps have given up looking for work because the economy is so bad. What’s most surprising is that the existence of this last group is completely ignored by the unemployment rate.
According to this result, the unemployment rate would be 14.3%. This is figured by calculating (10,000/(10,000+60,000)) = 14.3%. The 40,000 people who aren’t classified in the labor force are not involved in the calculation, even though this number likely includes those who need work and would gladly take a job if offered one.
Unemployment Rate Calculated

Flaws with Unemployment Calculations

There are multiple reasons why unemployment calculations are not completely accurate:
  1. The number of people left out of the work force is staggering. Millions of people have recently left the work force. The number of unemployed Americans would be more than a third higher if these people were included, which would in turn significantly increase the unemployment rate. Statistics also don’t reflect the number of recent grads who have declared themselves not looking for work.
  2. The household survey uses a limited sample size. Although 60,000 households may seem like a lot, it is hardly representative of the 115 million or so that exist in the United States. It is difficult to know how well these 60,000 households represent the country as a whole. Many factors go into the determination of who is unemployed, such as education, ethnicity, and geography (which can vary state to state, city to city, or even street to street). If a particular group was overrepresented or underrepresented, the figure can be strongly biased.
  3. Many people are included as employed when they don’t earn a livable income. Just because someone is classified as employed doesn’t mean they can survive off their income. They are the “under-employed” and are not represented in the federal unemployment rate. I have a friend whose employer only gives her work four days every two weeks, so she still has to live with her parents. Although she is technically employed, she cannot make ends meet with her part-time job. Furthermore, some are considered self-employed, but their business doesn’t earn substantial income. Many other jobs, such as farm workers or tourist companies, offer seasonal employment, so someone classified as employed may only work for a couple of months.
  4. The business survey double counts people who have multiple jobs. If you work on a fryline at KFC, do auto body work, and help out with a landscaping company, you will add three jobs to the survey. In other words, your part-time job may end up “counting” for someone who is actually unemployed. This makes it difficult to know how many people really have jobs, especially in times when many must find a second job just to get by.
  5. Overlap can cause confusion. Some people fall into a couple of unemployment situations. For example, students are normally left out of the work force. However, if a high school student starts looking for a job, they become part of the work force and are classified as unemployed until they find one. People are also counted as employed if they just lost their job, but worked during the week of reference the statistician was using.
  6. People are classified as employed as long as they “technically” still have a job. Often, someone is placed on temporary leave due to a variety of issues, but it’s clear they are at risk of losing their job permanently. Others have to leave for medical reasons, but may not be able to return to work. These people may know they won’t go back to work again, but until their employment status is sorted out, they are classified as employed.
  7. What Is the Real Unemployment Rate?

    Unemployment is difficult to calculate accurately for a number of reasons. The biggest problem is that the true unemployment rate is subjective. Here are some questions you might ask yourself when deciding what the real unemployment rate is:
    1. Should we count someone as unemployed if they want a job but aren’t looking for one?
    2. Should someone who doesn’t feel like working be classified as unemployed instead of being out of the labor force?
    3. Should disabled citizens who can’t work be classified as unemployed?
    4. Should self-employed people be classified as unemployed if they have no income?
    5. Should high school students be included in the calculation?
    In addition to the BLS, other organizations measure unemployment and can produce rates up to two times as much or higher than the rate determined by the government.

    Final Word

    Considering the factors above, it’s easy to see how unemployment rates can be misleading. If you need to get a sense of how many people have jobs, be skeptical of figures provided by the federal and state governments. In fact, as unemployment benefits expire, the numbers may actually appear to improve in some states.
    Unemployment is certainly an important factor to consider when assessing the overall health of the economy, but may be best measured by your own personal experience. If you are one of the many unemployed who aren’t finding work, look less to the overall state of the economy and more toward ways that you might be able to make the best use of your unemployment.