I Should Stop Working and Go on Welfare
in Work Place

Kescarte_DeJudica · May 2018

A Little Background

I've always had an interest in creating passive income for myself. The thought of my money making more money for me, or the rewards of previous effort I had expended coming back to me multiplied several times over, always excited me.

From the age of 14, I realized I would someday have to work 40 hours a week ( or more) to support myself, the same as most everyone else. I hated the very prospect of this. Not because I disliked working, far from it, but because of the obligation, the trap that working was. The thought of having to do the same sort of thing for half my waking hours every day, five days a week, was just awful. I realized I would have precious little time for much else in my life. I searched for a solution, a way out of this seemingly inevitable path I was on.

I tried several things. Read a lot of books about how to become wealthy, bought into some of those mail order schemes, ran businesses like a mowing business. While other kids focus on school, sports, video games, and dating, I focused on finding a way out of the rat race. Depending on who you asked, I was either really mature, or really dumb.

I spent a lot of time on this, but never really got anywhere. Part of the reason for this is because I was underage, so I legally couldn't trade stocks, or buy real estate, or drive myself around. I also stayed home a lot. So, I was somewhat limited in what opportunities I had to take advantage of.

I worked some part time, and some full time growing up. Part time wasn't too awful, but full time was everything I had dreamed it to be. Being gone 8 hours a day, having to get up when the sun was peaking over the horizon, coming home when it was sinking past the mountains. Feeling like the week was blowing by me so quickly, as if I was trapped, missing out on so many good things life had to offer. I couldn't meet up with friends. If someone needed to talk, I couldn't be there. Former neighbors came up to visit for the afternoon, and I completely missed them. As for the money I made... what good was it? I had precious few investment opportunities I was eligible for, and no time to enjoy the things I spent it on.

The Turning Point

Right before I turned 18, I came to a somewhat painful realization. My whole point to trying to find a way out of the rat race was so that I could avoid the seemingly inevitable sentence of spending the majority of my time concentrated on money, and not having time for anything else. But in trying to escape this, I had created a very different version of it for myself! I had denied myself from trying new interests, like starting a YouTube channel, because I had wanted to "wait until I was in a better position." My health had become poor due to staying up late. My relationships with family was a bit worn, and I had little in the ways of friends. I had made my own trap, trying to avoid one I was headed for. And this made me very upset.

I stopped spending so much time trying to generate passive income. I still spent some time on it, but only a more appropriate, healthy amount. I began spending more time on my health, and on relationships with others. Within a year, I had started a YouTube channel, made many friends, and had become closer to my family. I also became more health conscious, starting eating and sleeping better, and tried cutting out bad habits I had formed.

This helped me come to three very important conclusions. First, my life needs balance. If I spend too much time on one activity, everything else will suffer for lack of attention spent on it, such as relationships and health.

Second, it'll be very, very difficult to escape work while I am working to support myself full time as an adult, because I'll have precious little time for much else. And if most of my time is being spent building a secondary source of passive income, I'll have next to no time to focus on health, relationships, and personal interests.

Third, I need to focus more on getting lots of time rather than getting lots of money. My plan had originally always been to obtain a lot of money, and thus be able to buy my time back. But, what if I was to find a way to have a lot of time first... and then use my extra time to obtain the money I needed? This way, I wouldn't have to be working myself ragged, and a lot of the pressure would be off. In addition, I would now have enough time to look after my health and have relationships. It would allow me to be much more flexible, opening up all sorts of opportunities to invest financially, to invest in relationships, to help people who needed a hand up, all sorts of things!

A New Plan

After more research, and several months of working out the bugs, I made a new plan. My plan is to finish college, and work in my chosen field for as long as it takes me to save up a year's worth of living expenses, likely 2-3 years. I will then quit, (or perhaps get fired) and receive welfare. Once I am on welfare, I will spend some of my spare time working to climb out of it, by building up a source of passive income. With the stress of providing gone, I can work on it gradually, when I have time, without being obsessed over it and rushing the process along too much out of desperation.

The Incredible Benefits

Once I get to the point where I am on welfare, I will undoubtedly see a large improvement in my quality of life. This will be for several reasons. First, a major portion of the pressure of living by the clock will be gone. I won't have to schedule my day so rigidly. This will allow me to be more flexible in taking life as it comes. If a friend needs to talk, I can talk with him. If my mother needs help moving furniture, I can go over to her house and help her. If a sunbeam looks especially appealing, I can lie in it and soak it up, instead of glancing wistfully at it as I grab my keys and head to the office. Additionally, the lack of a rigid schedule will lead to less stress, and thus better health.

Speaking of which, I'll now have more time to focus on my health. I can spend time cooking nutritious meals, and sharpening my culinary skills, instead of grabbing a quick bite at a restaurant or throwing something quick together at home. I'll have time to exercise. I'll feel better and look better at the same time.

I'll have more time for relationships. I can be there for my siblings, my parents, my friends. And when I get married, the benefits become even greater. I can spend more time with my wife and children. I won't have to be gone from them half the day, and too tired to play with them and show them love and affection the other half. My wife won't have to feel pressure to work and help pay the bills. We can have time for dates, and for taking care of ourselves, and one another. I won't have to miss the special moments that happen at odd times, the wondrous parts of my children growing up. Like when they take their first steps, or learn to ride a bike. They'll have the security of their parents being home with them, and the closeness that brings.

I'll have time to work on building up passive income too, as I already mentioned. I can start little side projects, things I like and am interested in. For example, I believe I mentioned I wanted to start a YouTube channel. I have done that, and not having to work would give me time to work on my channel, something I am actually passionate about. And with time, it could have the potential to grow and support me and my family, so that we can leave the welfare system. And that isn't the only opportunity either, I could try some other things too. And without the pressure of having to make this my ticket out by a certain deadline, I could take my time and enjoy the process.

The Cherry on Top

Perhaps the strongest, and most ironic point of all, is found in the nation's tax system. If I was to try and work to support myself, the government would be weighing me down, by taking 25% of my earnings. What for? To pay for the very system I am planning on using! When I use this system, not only is the government giving me money instead, they are freeing up my time so that I can accomplish my objectives. I can either row against the current, or let the current carry me. Tell me... which sounds like a smarter move to you?

Addressing Concerns

Really, the biggest concerns with this plan are the ethics of it. Some might say I am stealing money from those who "really need it". Those who can't actually work, who the system is "designed" to help.

First off, I have a simple question. What about those receiving Social security retirement benefits? Should these people not be taking their benefits because they don't "need them"? You could say no, because they have paid into the system and earned their benefits. Well, I will have done the same. Having worked a few years, I will have contributed by paying my taxes, and will now be receiving the benefits I have paid for and earned, some of which I would not qualify for if I hadn't paid for them.

As for what the system is "designed for", the welfare system is not designed to help poor people that can't earn their own way. If that were the case, people with phobias of spiders wouldn't qualify as "disabled." And neither would people who have a million dollar net worth, but no income, so they qualify for disability. I'm not stealing, I am meeting the rules, legally, and ethically.

That's my argument. Thank for reading everyone!

SilverishGoldNova · May 2018

You know Kesc, knowing how this debate went last time on Reddit CMV, I highly doubt we're gonna see anyone say something besides "You're a scumbag", "it won't work because I say so", "nobody will marry you".

Kescarte_DeJudica · May 2018

@SilverishGoldNova
That's entirely possible SGN. When I did this debate on DDO, it was very civil, but that is because I sought out a professional opponent, instead of posting openly in forums. Still, I have a bit of hope left that we may see an argument that brings up good points against such a lifestyle, other than the same old sort of personal attack junk, or some study that shows being abnormal will cause you and your family deep psy@SilverishGoldNova

Show me a study that says not working will cause you health problems, and I will not only show how it doesn't apply, but in turns how a stufy on how the average high school student today has more psychological problems then a patient in a psychiatric ward in the 1950's.

SilverishGoldNova · May 2018

By the way, I actually agree with this guys statement (salty comments incoming), and so I can debate it on his behalf if necessary.

Kescarte_DeJudica · May 2018

Please do! I could use the help.

someone234 · May 2018

We all die and you gotta hustle your own way in life. Do your thing and know your worth. If you can pull it off and are happy with the lifestyle, abuse the system as much as you can. The backlash, if any, is yours to take and the shame that comes along with such a lifestyle is part and parcel of it. Hustle the welfare system and be the best at it.

WokeWhale · May 2018

When I first read the topic my initial thought was "well looks like we have here the definition of stupid. But then I actually read your arguments and honestly I'm persuaded. The final verdict seems to be "you should".

Kescarte_DeJudica · May 2018

@WokeWhale

Wow, that's really cool, thanks for letting me know. Can I ask what specifically changed your mind?

Ampersand · May 2018

I don't know which country you're in so I can't be specific, but it's doubtful that you'd qualify for enough welfare to live comfortably in my country (the UK).

Like most countries including the USA there is no single "Welfare" but rather a variety of different levels and types of benefit you can receive depending on your condition. For instance you won't get the Child Tax Credit portion of the universal credit unless - shock and horror - you actually have a child. Similarly one of the main general purpose payments that people get by on in this country is the portion for unemployed job-seekers - which you wouldn't qualify for as you aren't working a job. Without that I can't see you being able get enough to live on.

Your argument seems to be you will go on welfare and be given money. Welfare doesn't work like that. To see if this is even feasible before we get into the ethics of it, what you actually need to do is lay out the specific forms of welfare you will be applying for and how you meet their criteria.

WokeWhale · May 2018

@Kescarte_DeJudica "The Incredible Benefits" section was probably the strongest motivator haha. Really opened my eyes.

Kescarte_DeJudica · May 2018

@someone234

Thanks for your input. I agree, no matter what you decide to do in life, you should take responsibility for your actions.

Kescarte_DeJudica · May 2018

@WokeWhale

I'm glad to hear that. A lot of people don't realize how much conventional working hours take away from their lives, or they get so used to it or see it as inevitable that they don't really think about it. Others who I have told this to have also downplayed what I said, arguing that the benefits are not as substantial as first meets the eye.

It boils down in part to priorities. If you prioritize time, it is wise to structure your life in a way that frees up time. If money is your priority, it probably suits you better to structure your life to maximize your income. And so on and so on.

In any event, it is important to know what you want, and then create a plan for how to make those desires reality. It is rarely easy, but almost always worth it.

Kescarte_DeJudica · May 2018

@Ampersand

You're right. Welfare composes many different programs, each with their own set of qualifiers.

Let me c&p some specific programs I intend to qualify for, and how, here from another debate (for reference, I am in the USA).

First off, the matter of disability. I have a phobia that I have had since age 13. One that has been so bad at times I have had to receive counseling for it. While I will not say what the object I am afraid of is (because you know how internet trolls are, and the kind of stuff they'll do), I will say it is a makeup product, used exclusively by women.

Hard as it is to believe, this phobia does have potential to qualify as a disability. Specifically, an anxiety disorder, that is, a mental disorder.

Allow me to refer you to section 12.06, of the Social Security's "Listings of Adult Impairment:

https://www.ssa.gov/disability/professionals/bluebook/12.00-MentalDisorders-Adult.htm#12_06

What I need is "medical documentation of the requirements of paragraph 1, 2, or 3. (To meet Part A) When exposed to the thing that causes my phobia, I do have difficulty concentrating, muscle tension and irritability. I do have panic attacks, in certain situations. I also have "involuntary, time-consuming preoccupation with intrusive, unwanted thoughts." So, I most certainly satisfy the requirements for Part A.

Now, I also need to either meet the requirements of either Part B or C. I can meet Part B, because I do have "marked limitation" in interacting with others (women who use the product I have trouble interacting with, and since that applies to about 95% of women, that is an issue.) I also have the limitation in "Concentrate, persist, or maintain pace," since the object is mentally bothersome and distracting for me, and can even cause me the need to leave the area in certain circumstances, just because of how fearful I become and the reaction I have.

I will began building up a medical history of my condition about a year before I stop working, that is, one greater than I already have. I've received counseling from a psychologist before for this issue, and I noted it on a form for my primary doctor, but I haven't really been "tested" for it. This will ensure I have plenty of of documentation to support my application when the time comes.

Here is a link to the 5 step process that Disability Determination Services uses to decide if you are disabled:

https://www.ssa.gov/planners/disability/qualify.html

Step 1 asks whether I am working. I won't be, as I will have stopped when I make my claim, so that will be no. Step 2 asks whether my condition "interferes with basic work-related activities". It most certainly does, especially if I must interact with women who use the makeup product that I have the phobia for. Depending on the circumstances, the interaction is often either icy, strained, or not even able to take place.

Step 3 asks if my condition is found in the listing of impairments, which as I have already shown, is indeed the case. So, I do qualify as disabled, as per the requirements of the Social security Administration.

My first order of business will be applying for disability. To help me through the process with filling out paperwork, and going through the appeals process if necessary, I will be hiring a lawyer. The nice thing about disability lawyers is that you don't have to pay them out of pocket. Indeed, they can't even charge you, by law.

How disability lawyers get paid is when your application is accepted, and you qualify for disability payments, you are owed back pay for the months you were involved in the application process, in addition to your regular payments beginning immediately. Your lawyer is payed a portion of this back pay. If you are not awarded, your lawyer isn't payed. Quite the incentive for my lawyer to do well, if I do say so myself.

If I have earned enough credit for the past 2-3 years of working, I'll qualify for social security disability payments, How much it will be per month will depend on my earnings record. I could probably estimate it, but it would be difficult to come up with a figure now, years in advance of when I plan to put this part of my plan into action.

However, if my disability benefit for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) was under $750 per month, I would qualify for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) as well. If I wasn't eligible for SSDI, I would qualify for SSI. If my SSDI benefit was more than $750/month, I wouldn't qualify for SSI

Source:
https://www.disabilitysecrets.com/page5-43.html
https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/SSI.html

So, I will receive at least $750/month from disability, either as SSDI, SSI, or some of both.

Now, the nice thing about applying for disability first is once you get that, the application process for other programs is almost automatic. After receiving disability, I can apply for Medicaid, health insurance paid for by the state. I'll have insurance for general health, dental, optical, etc, with no deductibles or copays. The only copays are those for prescription and non-prescription drugs, with are $1.50 and $3 respectively.

Source: (I live in Tennessee)
https://www.tn.gov/tenncare/members-applicants/eligibility/tenncare-medicaid.html
https://www.tn.gov/tenncare/members-applicants/co-payments/co-pays-other-than-pharmacy-co-pays.html
https://www.tn.gov/tenncare/members-applicants/co-payments/pharmacy-co-pays.html

Food stamps (EBT). I will qualify for these, but when I took an eligibility test, I found out I would receive around $16-$24 as a single adult. This was mainly because I am already receiving a good portion of income from social security disability. Still, a little extra doesn't hurt none, and at least items bought with EBT are exempt from sales tax.

Temporary Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP). This is where I expect to get the bulk of my food from. How TEFAP works is extra food is purchased from farmers by the USDA, usually excess products that can't be sold, and redistributed to food banks and soup kitchens, which then distribute the food to eligible recipients of this program. Additionally, many of the canned good and boxed foods donated to food banks are handed out to program recipients, as well as foods purchased with federal grant money. Once I qualify for this program, I can visit my local food bank once or twice a month, and pick out food by using "credits" in my "account."

Source:
https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/emergency-food-assistance-program-tefap

Low Income Home Energy Program (LIHEAP). This program will give me discounts on utility bills, typically 20% to 40% per month. I may also qualify for free insulation improvement, or energy-efficient light bulbs.

Source:
https://www.acf.hhs.gov/ocs/programs/liheap

Lifeline. This one surprised me. I can get phone service each month. 750 minutes, unlimited text messaging, and 1GB of mobile data per month.

Source: https://www.lifelinesupport.org/ls/customer-rules-rights.aspx

Housing Assistance. I can qualify for Section 8 vouchers, which allow me to pick which home I can live in from a list of available homes. There is a waiting list, thought that is more common for public housing then Section 8, since Section 8 is a contracting program.

What I do plan on doing is if I have been living in one apartment of house awhile, I'll approach my landlord, and explain to him that I am looking to get section 8 housing due to financial matters. I'll inform him that he would be able to continue our current rental agreement through section 8, by signing the appropriate paperwork. He'll then receive the same amount of money each month for rent, and won't have to go through the time and expense of finding a replacement tenant. This would be a win-win situation, since I wouldn't have to be on a waiting list. A smart solution to a rather sticky problem.

According to the Section 8 rules, I would have to spend 30% of my income on rent, and they would pay the other 70%. None of the benefit I am receiving count as income, except for disability, which is at least $750. So, if I am living in a $500/month house or apartment, I can expect to be paying $150 a month out of pocket for rent, and have the other $350 picked up by Housing and Urban Development.

Source:
https://www.hud.gov/topics/housing_choice_voucher_program_section_8

Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). I can qualify for this credit, without a child or spouse. I wouldn't receive much, roughly $450-$500 per year, but I would qualify for it assuming my income is low (which it is). The catch is I have to be 25 or older, so I would have to wait a couple of years. Still, something nice to look forward too.

Source:
https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/individuals/earned-income-tax-credit/claiming-eitc-without-a-qualifying-child

As you can see, I qualify for 7 programs, none of which are temporary, as is the case with TANF. Let's tally up the benefit amounts and see how much I would be eligible to receive per month.

SSDI/SSI: $750 (cash)

Medicaid: $150 (approx value of insurance)

EBT: $16 (approx value of food stamps)

Section 8: $350 (approx value of rent subsidy)

TEFAP: $100 (approx value of food received)

LIHEAP: $50 (rough approx value of credit)

Lifeline: $25 (approx value of phone service)

Total: $1441/month, or $17,292 per year.

This may not seem like much, but where I live, this is a fairly comfortable amount for a single man to live on. And for spending money, I can do some odd work here and there, such as mow lawns, designs websites, make logos, freelance stuff like that. Since I can earn up to $700 a month before I start affecting benefits, I can get my monthly income up to $1856, or $22,272 per year. And that is just for a single guy. When I get married, the benefits will get larger, and when we have children, we'll qualify for other programs as well. A pretty comfortable income, considering I don't have to work full time, and with certain benefits dropping off in tiers, I can gradually climb out by building passive income.

SilverishGoldNova · May 2018

Ampersand said:

I don't know which country you're in so I can't be specific, but it's doubtful that you'd qualify for enough welfare to live comfortably in my country (the UK).

Like most countries including the USA there is no single "Welfare" but rather a variety of different levels and types of benefit you can receive depending on your condition. For instance you won't get the Child Tax Credit portion of the universal credit unless - shock and horror - you actually have a child. Similarly one of the main general purpose payments that people get by on in this country is the portion for unemployed job-seekers - which you wouldn't qualify for as you aren't working a job. Without that I can't see you being able get enough to live on.

Your argument seems to be you will go on welfare and be given money. Welfare doesn't work like that. To see if this is even feasible before we get into the ethics of it, what you actually need to do is lay out the specific forms of welfare you will be applying for and how you meet their criteria.

tl;dr He has a phobia which has been documented by a doctor and a psychiatrist, and he can make up to $700 a month before he cannot qualify for welfare, meaning he can make up to $22,272 a year, and if he gets married much more.

It has been shown that it is possible for people to live more successfully on welfare than on jobs/

joecavalry · May 2018

Welfare should only be given to U.S. citizens that work. That must be a requirement for the welfare system to prevent money being lost by the U.S. government.

BaconToes · May 2018

joecavalry said:

Welfare should only be given to U.S. citizens that work. That must be a requirement for the welfare system to prevent money being lost by the U.S. government.

what if people are disabled and can't work.
And people pay tax, replenishing the welfare.

EmeryPearson · May 2018

This could perhaps work short-term.

Filing for disability due to a phobia is mighty difficult, as you have to prove it prevents you from working. For instance, you can have a sincere phobia of clowns, but unless that prevents you from putting in work hours, it's not going to be cause for disability. OCD and Anxiety are the most likely candidates to succeed in this regard. You will also require years of medical evidence in support, not a year, but years, if you hope for this to succeed. Especially as your phobia is far more specific than OCD or Anxiety.

You can also supplement your income every month as you stated, for a single year. Regular supplemental income for more than 12 months can disqualify you. Disability is also reviewed every 6 months to 3 years, which is also an opportunity to cease your benefits.

You could pull this off, but you'd only be scratching by and place yourself in a situation where you earn very little work experience and can have your income taken away from you at basically any moment.

Ampersand · May 2018

@Kescarte_DeJudica

A few major problems. The majority of your income is based on your registering as disabled, but based on your description you wouldn't qualify as disabled. Although you talk through how you qualify based on meeting certain criteria, you notably don't state how you meet all the criteria and those you don't mention are the ones where you seem like you would trip up and be disqualified. Notably you need to show that you are unable to work at your current job and that you are unable to find alternative employment.

As you are not only working at the moment but planning to continue working for the next few years only quitting when you feel financially secure - you are obviously able to work despite any distress from your vague phobia. Ergo you would not qualify for SSD or Medicaid. I mean even if you want to try and argue you should, you'd still fall at the final hurdle as you have to show you can't work in other jobs. As you are distressed by some form of lady's cosmetics, you should still be able to do a wide range of jobs - for instance working in a call centre where there is no physical engagement with customers and practically engagement with other staff.

That brings you down to $541 per month or £6,492 per year. However that assumes you can get section 8. While it is possible - though you have no guarantee your landlord will want to register as a section 8 leaser, you won't have that to begin with. Funding for section 8 is limited. Not only are there waiting lists, the waiting lists aren't even always open due to overdemand. Here's the Section 8 application page for Housing in LA for instance - you literally have to wait to have the chance to be put on a waiting list! So when you begin this idea of yours, you will be applying for section 8 money but it will be unknown how long it will be before you can get it - the specifics will vary by state. So to start off with you'll actually be proceeding with $191 per month or $2292 per year indefinitely.

Some of the other benefits might rise a little to compensate, but without SSD you're basically screwed.

Now only that, but moving on to the idea itself trying to become a YouTube superstar is a pretty bad idea. 96.5% of people who try to make a living off of YouTube won't earn enough to even break the poverty line and the 3.5% who do aren't necessarily far above it.

Finally you're messing up your life chances. Odds are that if you try to become a YouTube star full time you will fail and need to get another job. Except - wait - you now have a big gap in your work history and you hope (even though I disagree you will suceed) to have been registered as having a mental disability so severe it stops you from working. That's a massive anchor that will hold back your career prospects.

Kescarte_DeJudica · May 2018

@joecavalry

I agree, except I would take it one step further. We should abolish government welfare programs entirely, and have the responsibility for looking after the needs of the legitimately disadvantaged fall to charity. Not only would this help get rid of actual fraud, people would now be giving money to these efforts to help people get back on their feet, rather than only contributing because they are forced too. They also would be able to choose the organization they thought was most effective at helping the most amount of people in the best way for their dollar. In this way, we could end money being wasted on a nationwide, monopoly that has long since shown it is ineffective.

Kescarte_DeJudica · May 2018

@BaconToes

You're right, people do pay tax to replenish the system. However, even if someone is disabled, that should not entitle them to receive money they did not earn that was taken by force from those who did earn it.

Kescarte_DeJudica · May 2018

@EmeryPearson

The welfare system is not setup to help people short-term, especially disability. It is setup to sustain people who can or will not earn their own income, fostering a sort of dependence on the system. That is how it is setup in the USA.

You actually do not have to prove the disability keeps you from working. That is one of the "myths" of disability. If you had checked out one of my source,s you would see that you only have to prove your disability keeps you from working if you don't pass Step 3 in the determination process, which means your condition matches one on the list of impairments. In my case, it does, so that is irrelevant. All I have to do is show that my condition "interferes with work-related activities", a much easier task.

Source:

https://www.ssa.gov/planners/disability/qualify.html

Secondly, regular income does not disqualify you for welfare benefits, as long as it is below a certain amount. Currently, that amount varies per program, but the lowest figure is $850, which is the amount a single man can earn before he starts triggering the "Substantial Gainful Activity" clause of disability rules. If you earn less than this every month, you'll be fine.

https://www.disabilitysecrets.com/resources/social-security-disability/ssdi/income-limits-ssdi-benefits

EmeryPearson · May 2018

@Kescarte_DeJudica

"The welfare system is not setup to help people short-term, especially disability. It is setup to sustain people who can or will not earn their own income, fostering a sort of dependence on the system. That is how it is setup in the USA."

This is irrelevant, to the reasonable suggestion that you would not be able to maintain disability with such a specific phobia. It would only work short term, or more likely, not at all. This is a hypothetical based of the unlikely chance that your phobia would result in disability, which is highly unlikely, as your physically and mentally able to work.

"You actually do not have to prove the disability keeps you from working. That is one of the "myths" of disability. If you had checked out one of my source,s you would see that you only have to prove your disability keeps you from working if you don't pass Step 3 in the determination process, which means your condition matches one on the list of impairments. In my case, it does, so that is irrelevant. All I have to do is show that my condition "interferes with work-related activities", a much easier task."

Your condition must be severe, you would not advanced to step 3.

Kescarte_DeJudica · May 2018

@Ampersand

Let me see if I can address these points you bring up.

First off, you don't have to meet all the criteria. You only have to meet certain criteria that can vary, as long as you meet a minimum amount. I've already shown what symptoms I display in Part A in Sec. 12.06, and how that qualifies me as having an anxiety disorder, more than the minimum as well. I'm not sure what you are referring to by "those you don't mention are the ones where you seem like you would trip up and be disqualified". I covered everything so far as I can see, but if I overlooked something, please outline what exactly it was.

Second, you are mistaken when you say you have to prove that you cannot work and find alternative employment. That only applies if you don't match one of the conditions on the Listing of Impairments, which I do in my case. You would have seen this if you looked at the five steps involved in the disability determination process. Here is the link again:

https://www.ssa.gov/planners/disability/qualify.html

Third, it isn't that simple. Phobias aren't as simple as "Oh, well you're fine now, so it isn't a problem. Sometime,s you can be fine, and the next day, can be all over the place physically and emotionally. What doesn't bother you one day might significantly effect you the next, and the level is rarely consistent or practical. Ad for call centers, the majority of the workers in there are women, so that is a poor example. However, that doesn't apply anyway because you don't have to show that you can't work at all, only that your condition effects your basic work related activities.

Currently, I work in an environment where I do not come into contact with this product. If I came into contact with it to a certain degree (difficult to explain without saying what the product is), I would have to leave the premise because of the amount of mental anxiety and the effect is has on me physically, making me unable to breathe or see clearly. Again though, the severity is not always consistent. I don't socialize much or date in part due to this phobia. Some days I can be in public without it bothering me, others I don't want to leave the house.

"you have no guarantee your landlord will want to register as a section 8 leaser"

You're right, but I'm going off of probability here, and a little knowledge of how real estate works. A tenant leaving is a hassle for a landlord, due to the cost of finding a replacement tenant, and the lack of income coming in from the property while it is vacant. Plus, there is no guarantee the new tenants will be quite so desirable. If I have lived in one place for awhile ,and have established a good relationship with my landlord, he would likely rather register for section 8 than loose a good tenant. Especially since he would not only be making the same amount of money each money, but would possibly receive tax benefits for housing someone who is disabled.

However, if he was unwilling to do that, I could still get by. I could get on a waiting list, and scrape by until I was approved. It is probably a good idea to point out here that disabled people are higher priority on wait lists than non-disabled people (except in the case of families vs. single men). Also, you used a bad example with the waiting list from Los Angeles. Waiting lists are always worse in really large cities, where poverty is especially rampant in proportion to available housing, due to higher costs and more people per square mile. Where I live, in a small town, the same is not the case, because people are more spread out and good housing is more available.

Your link was just to a Google search of "youtube incoem poverty", not really a credible source. It looks like you just searched the keyword for your argument and cited the first figure you saw without even examining it to gauge the credibility. I clicked on the first result, an article by Fortune magazine.

http://fortune.com/2018/02/27/youtube-success-poverty-wages/

The article had several errors that most people who haven't done YouTube wouldn't have noticed. First off, they wrote this article shortly after the whole "adpocalypse" debacle. This hurt all channels great and small, and the article did not account for their poor timing by even mentioning this. Second, they calculated the amount of money made from ad revenue at $1 per 1000 views. This is grossly inaccurate, because the average amount varies from $2 to $4 per 1000 views. Additionally, this varies based on watch time rather than just views. You'll make a lot more money if someone watches your whole video as opposed to just part of it. So, someone like PewDiePie who makes entertainment-based content is going to make a different ad rate than someone who makes tutorial-based content like Muazz. The article also leaves out any mention of Patreon, a platform YouTubers use to except donations from viewers, an additional monetization option beyond ad revenue. Target demographics are important to discuss here too. Young children are less likely to use ad blockers than adults, but adults are more likely to donate via Patreon. Thus, it is important to adjust your monetization strategies accordingly.

Perhaps the most obvious flaw in the article is their figure of 96.5%. I attempted to locate the cited study of one Mathias Bärtl, but was unsuccessful, due to the fact that his study was hosted in PDF form on a site that desires $36 to gain access to it. Since I haven't seen the study, I cannot disprove the figure on its own merit, but that will not be necessary, I can do so on one's lack of ability to come to such a figure in the first place.

The article states: "In fact, 96.5 percent of all of those trying to become YouTubers won’t make enough money off of advertising to crack the U.S. poverty line", but gives no perimeters for what qualifies as "trying to become YouTubers". Again, one needs to look at how the site works. What is this figure based off of? If it is based off of all the channels in existence, then it is flawed from the beginning. On YouTube, you may view videos with or without a Google account. However, if you wish to interact with channels via subscribing, liking/disliking, or leaving comments, you must be signed in with a google account and have created a "channel." To do this, you agree to a statement about terms and conditions, and Voila you have a registered YouTube channel.

Now, most people don't upload to this channel, though they can. They just use it for the purposes of interacting with videos creators in all the aforementioned ways. If you are using all created channels in your 96.5% figure, than your argument won't hold water because these "channels" aren't channels at all, they are just accounts. These users don't produce content.

Now, if your figure takes into account this aspect of YouTube, and only includes channels that have uploaded content, well now the situation becomes even more complicated. Again, what is your criteria for "trying"? Are you going to lump someone who makes tutorial videos with a kid who uploads a 30 second game clip from Clash of Clans on his channel twice a year? Does the rate at which videos are produced matter? Gaming channels might upload daily or multiple times a day, but animation channels may only make a video every couple of months. And what about video resolution?

I'm sorry to have gotten off on such a lengthy tangent with the section on YouTube in a debate about welfare, but this is an important point. You need to carefully examine your sources for facts, instead of doing a web search and reporting the first figure you see as factual. This article never once cited a YouTubers, no it was written citing studies from university professors who have nothing to do with YouTube, and are extremely unqualified for creating accurate studies on the platform, which is why you see a ridiculous figure like 96.5% being thrown around.

Now, I'm not saying becoming successful on YouTube is easy, because it isn't. It is difficult to be successful as an entertainer, whether you make YouTube videos, play baseball professionally, or play in a band and do tours. But I never said that I needed to be an overnight success, nor did I say this was my sole plan for creating passive income, it was only the one example I went into great detail with, I have plenty of other options at my disposal, the sky is the limit!

As for the gap in work history, I believe I have already demonstrated that a career is not a desirable option that I wish to engage with over a long term. If I cannot use welfare as a vehicle to get out of a traditional career path, than I will use something else. Be it category-based spending, freelancing, I'll find a way.

And I've been on the other side of the desk before sir, I've both hired and fired employees. In the two companies I have worked with, work gaps are an issue if they are unexplained or look like they could be potential problems. If I show that my gap was the cause of medical problems, then it isn't quite the same problem as one that is just unexplained. Also, this is less of an issue with technical careers such as computer work where the labor is skilled, rather than unskilled labor, because it is more easily replaceable, and so dependability plays a larger role.

I believe I have adequately addressed all your points. If you would care to create rebuttals, please consult sources more carefully.

Kescarte_DeJudica · May 2018

@EmeryPearson

The suggestion isn't reasonable, because I have already shown being mentally and physically able to work does not apply here.

Please notice that the Social Security Administration's website puts the word "severe" in quotation marks. This is a sign that the word severe is subjective and based on more clarification, which follows in the next paragraph.

Here is what follows:

"Your condition must interfere with basic work-related activities for your claim to be considered. If it does not, we will find that you are not disabled.

If your condition does interfere with basic work-related activities, we go to Step 3."

As I have already shown, my condition does indeed interfere with basic work related activities, in many situations. It also effects my social life rather dramatically, which is an important point in Step 3. It is important take note of the subjectivity of such words as "severe", especially when dealing with government agencies.

Also, I would like to add something to a point you made in your last paragraph, that I failed to adequately address:

"You could pull this off, but you'd only be scratching by and place yourself in a situation where you earn very little work experience and can have your income taken away from you at basically any moment."

If you work at one company, you'll have very little work experience if you are laid off, your only experience will be with one company. And the same thing applies, if you are laid off, your income can be "taken away from you at basically any moment." This is a weak point because the same thing applies to working, this is a risk for all source of income that rely on you being paid for meeting certain requirements. Except in this instance, this isn't more secure than welfare, it is less secure. The reason is you can build up work experience while you are on welfare. Case in point, I can do computer work while on welfare to a limited degree, via freelancing, thus building up diverse work experience. And if the source of my income is "taken away", and I go looking for a job, not only do I have more diverse work experience than some guy laid off fro ma tech company, the company will get a tax credit for hiring me since they are hiring me off of welfare.

SilverishGoldNova · May 2018

So this debate has actually gone better than I thought it would have. It's good to see how there are actual arguments here, rather than "SCUMBAG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Kescarte_DeJudica · May 2018

@SilverishGoldNova

Agreed. It is nice to see people being civil and respectful about such a controversial topic. The degree of professionalism is a refreshing change.

frame

Howdy, Stranger!

Communities

6/16: CBS Weekend News

In this Debate

I Should Stop Working and Go on Welfare
in Work Place

Debra AI Prediction

Arguments

Back To Top

foot

DebateIsland.com

Contact us

Get In Touch

frame

Howdy, Stranger!

Communities

6/16: CBS Weekend News

In this Debate

I Should Stop Working and Go on Welfarein Work Place

Debra AI Prediction

Arguments

Back To Top

foot

DebateIsland.com

Contact us

Get In Touch

I Should Stop Working and Go on Welfare
in Work Place