LabattBlue Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 http://news.yahoo.com/mich-governor-signs-48-month-welfare-limit-231915012.html Does anyone know what the current welfare laws are for NYS, in terms of how long you can be on welfare and also residency rules for newcomers from out of state?
WVUFootball29 Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 Far as I know in NYS if you are able to vote you can be on it for as long as needed. heck Chautauqua county is about half career welfare recipients.
BarkLessWagMore Posted September 7, 2011 Posted September 7, 2011 http://news.yahoo.com/mich-governor-signs-48-month-welfare-limit-231915012.html Does anyone know what the current welfare laws are for NYS, in terms of how long you can be on welfare and also residency rules for newcomers from out of state? What a great first step towards fiscal responsibility. I applaud it and I am also sure NYS will never adopt something similar.
LabattBlue Posted September 8, 2011 Author Posted September 8, 2011 What a great first step towards fiscal responsibility. I applaud it and I am also sure NYS will never adopt something similar. Yeah...why would Cuomo want to enact welfare reform when he can layoff members of the state workforce instead.
KD in CA Posted September 8, 2011 Posted September 8, 2011 Yeah...why would Cuomo want to enact welfare reform when he can layoff members of the state workforce instead. Aren't the two basically the same thing?
LabattBlue Posted September 8, 2011 Author Posted September 8, 2011 Aren't the two basically the same thing? Yeah, no big difference there.
DC Tom Posted September 8, 2011 Posted September 8, 2011 Aren't the two basically the same thing? Nah. State workers get lunch breaks.
OCinBuffalo Posted September 8, 2011 Posted September 8, 2011 Actually...Medicare and Medicaid is a much bigger problem. We have attracted the poor and elderly from other states at an alarming clip over the last 20 years, because our medicaid standards are "prime rib" while most other states are "mac and cheese". If you saw the numbers and what we paying out due to this migration, you'd cry. We are like the assclown Statue of Liberty...give me your poor, huddled masses...and we will make them dependent on us, make them live in crappy apartments, stand in line for hours to get a pittance, dehumanize them at the grocery store...and call ourselves "Compassionate".
KD in CA Posted September 8, 2011 Posted September 8, 2011 Yeah, no big difference there. So let's clarify. In state that is tens of billions of dollars in debt you are whining about the Gov reducing the state payroll costs? Do you have an alternate solution?
justnzane Posted September 8, 2011 Posted September 8, 2011 Aren't the two basically the same thing? ouch as a former CSEA memeber, I would have to be inclined to agree with you. That union needs to loosen up job descriptions/responsibilities, and enforce the rules in place to get rid of lazy workers. I had many peers and bosses that were protected despite hiding in offices,basements, and dorm rooms. There was one guy that was a sexual predator that scoped out freshman girls in plain view from a moving van and it took an act of god for him to be removed that position.
LabattBlue Posted September 8, 2011 Author Posted September 8, 2011 Do you have an alternate solution? Yes. Welfare reform(see link as to what they are doing in Michigan). The state workforce should be targeted, but the endless cycle of generations of families being on the welfare rolls should continue as is? Layoff state workers who in turn can't find work and move out of state, but leave the welfare gravy train alone. Sounds like a plan to me.
KD in CA Posted September 8, 2011 Posted September 8, 2011 (edited) Yes. Welfare reform(see link as to what they are doing in Michigan). The state workforce should be targeted, but the endless cycle of generations of families being on the welfare rolls should continue as is? When have I ever come within a thousand miles of suggesting that?? Layoff state workers who in turn can't find work and move out of state, but leave the welfare gravy train alone. Sounds like a plan to me. Doing both sounds like a better plan to me. It sounds like you are only interested in having someone else's gravy train derailed. p.s. The reason I keep bringing it up is because employee costs are the only expenditure large enough to make the kind of cuts necessary to fix the NYS budget. Edited September 8, 2011 by KD in CT
LabattBlue Posted September 8, 2011 Author Posted September 8, 2011 When have I ever come within a thousand miles of suggesting that?? Doing both sounds like a better plan to me. It sounds like you are only interested in having someone else's gravy train derailed. I agree that there is fat that can be trimmed in the state workforce(yes, in case you can't guess, I am part of that workforce), but if Cuomo believes that laying off several thousand state workers is going to fix the problems of the state deficit, he is dreaming. It is small potatoes as compared to the savings that can be had if they ever got serious about welfare reform. I am not even sure if it is currently being discussed by the state officials.
3rdnlng Posted September 8, 2011 Posted September 8, 2011 I agree that there is fat that can be trimmed in the state workforce(yes, in case you can't guess, I am part of that workforce), but if Cuomo believes that laying off several thousand state workers is going to fix the problems of the state deficit, he is dreaming. It is small potatoes as compared to the savings that can be had if they ever got serious about welfare reform. I am not even sure if it is currently being discussed by the state officials. Are you at work now?
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted October 4, 2011 Posted October 4, 2011 Layoff state workers who in turn can't find work and move out of state... So basically, you're telling us that state workers are so incompetent that no business in NYS would ever hire them?
KD in CA Posted October 4, 2011 Posted October 4, 2011 So basically, you're telling us that state workers are so incompetent that no business in NYS would ever hire them? And so we circle back to my original premise that most career government employees are just as useless as career welfare recipients. Only more expensive. Actually, I'd have much less of an issue with gov't employees if we simply abolished all public-sector defined benefit pension plans. Instead they can have a 401(k) like everyone else and in any year their gov't balances the budget it can give them a matching contribution.
Chef Jim Posted October 4, 2011 Posted October 4, 2011 And so we circle back to my original premise that most career government employees are just as useless as career welfare recipients. Only more expensive. Actually, I'd have much less of an issue with gov't employees if we simply abolished all public-sector defined benefit pension plans. Instead they can have a 401(k) like everyone else and in any year their gov't balances the budget has a surplus it can give them a matching contribution. Changed it to more accurately follow the private sector plans.
Recommended Posts