Nearly a quarter of Toronto residents live in poverty: James

[cheapmeister]

The picture is presented ward by ward — from Rexdale in Etobicoke to the far reaches of Scarborough and down to the lake. Of the 2,615,060 people living in Toronto, 604,050 — almost a quarter of them — are living in poverty.

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1209687--nearly-a-quarter-of-toronto-residents-live-in-poverty-james?bn=1


Wow so many poor peeps living in Toronto. Peeps think Toronto is such an advanced city but in reality is ain't any better than a place like Brampton. So why do they have so much poverty in Toronto? Brampton doesn't even have 1/4 poverty. Toronto surely is getting run down. In a few more years the city will have 1/2 the population in poverty.

[stuntman]

Does living in poverty mean a family goes hungry in Toronto?

[t3359]

Does living in poverty mean a family goes hungry in Toronto?

Hey look, I read the article and I found the answer:


The group says a person, living at the poverty line in Toronto ($18,759) and receiving all social assistance ($8,145.96), would run out of money on June 7 — using the same theoretical conditions of paying all your bills up front.

So what happens when they have no more money for the last 7 months?

bjl

[stuntman]

Hey look, I read the article and I found the answer:

So what happens when they have no more money for the last 7 months?

bjl

I guess they hibernate.
I don't know.....they obviously have to eat or they would die so the numbers don't really ad up there.

[RolandCouch]

Meh...just another sob story from Royson.

Nobody is forcing people to live in expensive Toronto.

I lived on far less $$$ than cited in the article when I was in school.

I'd love to see a 'breakdown' of where all this money goes, but I guess Royson cannot provide that...shocking.

[stuntman]

So for an individual he says they get $27K a year.
I don't know what the numbers are so I am going to guess:

-rent is 600-$1100 ($1100 for single bedroom) a month in Toronto right? = $13K a year at the top end.
-food is $250 a month (generous?) = $3K
-clothing (genereous) = $1K
-public transport = $1.5K

18.5K for a single person...and I think that is pretty generous. Throw in a wife and a couple of kids, add $4K more a year = $22.5K


????

[stuntman]

need answers before the economic nutbars join in.

[RolandCouch]

So for an individual he says they get $27K a year.
I don't know what the numbers are so I am going to guess:

-rent is 600-$1100 ($1100 for single bedroom) a month in Toronto right? = $13K a year at the top end.
-food is $250 a month (generous?) = $3K
-clothing (genereous) = $1K
-public transport = $1.5K

18.5K for a single person...and I think that is pretty generous. Throw in a wife and a couple of kids, add $4K more a year = $22.5K


????

Exactly what I'd love to see.

Where is the money being allocated?

[45ED]

So for an individual he says they get $27K a year.
I don't know what the numbers are so I am going to guess:

-rent is 600-$1100 ($1100 for single bedroom) a month in Toronto right? = $13K a year at the top end.
-food is $250 a month (generous?) = $3K
-clothing (genereous) = $1K
-public transport = $1.5K

18.5K for a single person...and I think that is pretty generous. Throw in a wife and a couple of kids, add $4K more a year = $22.5K


????

Income tax

[stealth]

Meh...just another sob story from Royson.

Nobody is forcing people to live in expensive Toronto.

I lived on far less $$$ than cited in the article when I was in school.

I'd love to see a 'breakdown' of where all this money goes, but I guess Royson cannot provide that...shocking.

True, if someone is on a fixed income or government handouts, why are they living in one of the most expensive cities in north America? Move to Beaverton, thunder bay or Timmins or something and cry me a river. Lots of nice places other than the ethnic ghettos of the GTA.
Housing, Like any other product, is something that should be based on what you can afford.

[arm2000]

Poverty line in Toronto is $18,759? Hmm, we lived with much less than this not too long ago and wasn't so bad as it sounds. We had house, phone, cable TV, Internet and enough food. The only real problem was the dentist bills.

[stuntman]

Income tax


The poverty line was put at 27K...with 18K of that in wages which is taxed at about $2K.
Are the 8K in social assistance taxable?

and the $22.5 I think is for living pretty decent I think, at least for a younger person.

[Agafaba]

I guess they hibernate.
I don't know.....they obviously have to eat or they would die so the numbers don't really ad up there.

Food banks, not paying the bills, working under the table, lots of ways to survive.

Honestly though I dont know how someone at 26k would run out of money so quickly, the report is likely written by someone who has no experience with low income lifestyles.

[flashy_mcflash]

True, if someone is on a fixed income or government handouts, why are they living in one of the most expensive cities in north America? Move to Beaverton, thunder bay or Timmins or something and cry me a river. Lots of nice places other than the ethnic ghettos of the GTA.
Housing, Like any other product, is something that should be based on what you can afford.

People are living in poverty in all those places too, where there is a smaller pool of jobs for a smaller breadth of skill sets.

[stealth]

People are living in poverty in all those places too, where there is a smaller pool of jobs for a smaller breadth of skill sets.
Yup, but for those that arent seriously even in the job market (and lets be real there are plenty of those, its not just the mythical single moms working 3 jobs and "cant make ends meet"), they may as well be somewhere where they can stretch their welfare dollar further.

[partytime2009]

So for an individual he says they get $27K a year.
I don't know what the numbers are so I am going to guess:

-rent is 600-$1100 ($1100 for single bedroom) a month in Toronto right? = $13K a year at the top end.
-food is $250 a month (generous?) = $3K
-clothing (genereous) = $1K
-public transport = $1.5K

18.5K for a single person...and I think that is pretty generous. Throw in a wife and a couple of kids, add $4K more a year = $22.5K


????


$22.5k net....How much would the person need gross?

[Oscillator]

Food banks, not paying the bills, working under the table, lots of ways to survive.

Honestly though I dont know how someone at 26k would run out of money so quickly, the report is likely written by someone who has no experience with low income lifestyles.

This. It is pretty easy to live a relatively decent life in Toronto even on low-income as compared to other countries (the U.S, for example). I guess these days if you don't have a CG jacket, every new iPad that comes out, a new car every few years, then you're living "below the poverty line".

[Oscillator]

So for an individual he says they get $27K a year.
I don't know what the numbers are so I am going to guess:

-rent is 600-$1100 ($1100 for single bedroom) a month in Toronto right? = $13K a year at the top end.
-food is $250 a month (generous?) = $3K
-clothing (genereous) = $1K
-public transport = $1.5K

18.5K for a single person...and I think that is pretty generous. Throw in a wife and a couple of kids, add $4K more a year = $22.5K


????

That is quite inflated for someone living on 27K/year. 1K/year for clothing? >600$ for one bed-room? Unless you're buying designer clothing or CG jackets, then clothing expenses would come no where near 1K/year. Some people can go years without clothing shopping, and if you're living on 27K/year, then looking flashy should be the least of your priorities. As for housing, its easy to decent 3 bedroom condos for 1200$/month. It is even easier to find one bedroom apartments in run-down buildings that go <500$. As for food and public transportation, you're estimates are quite close. Still, a person who is smart with their money can live a relatively decent life in the T.O on 27k/year and still have some money left over.

[divx]

Hey look, I read the article and I found the answer:



So what happens when they have no more money for the last 7 months?

bjl

so about $27k? I've lived on less than that back as a student, that number isn't so bad and is totally livable.

[Syne]

25% of people are whiners and have a sense of entitlement. Go Canada!

[BananaHunter]

The author is exaggerating a bit. It depends on how you define poverty. To me, poverty is not having the means to sustain basic necessities of life. Clearly this guy's figures don't add up. You can get by with just $18k for sure. You just have to be cheap and not eat out, not buy expensive groceries, and not buy the latest tech gadgets. With $18k income, you'll pay very little tax. You won't live in luxury, but you'll get by and maybe save a little.

If anything, poor people need to start learning to live within their means. You can only blame society so much for a poor job market and what not. Too many people buy things they don't need. I see so many idiots living in nice condos when they are living pay cheque to pay cheque. I see some idiots buying 2 cars when they don't need it. In some countries, if the same people had $18k to live per year, they wouldn't complain as much. You can't possibly expect Canada to offer even more society welfare to the poor. Canada is ALREADY one of the most generous countries in terms of social welfare. People here are spoiled and don't know what true poverty is like.

[hdave]

Royson James' writings all have his bias built right in to them.
I don't even read anything by him anymore.

[sherman51]

True, if someone is on a fixed income or government handouts, why are they living in one of the most expensive cities in north America? Move to Beaverton, thunder bay or Timmins or something and cry me a river. Lots of nice places other than the ethnic ghettos of the GTA.
Housing, Like any other product, is something that should be based on what you can afford.

Minimum wage in Toronto is the same as the cities mentioned above.
People want to live in the city and then complain that they can't afford it but don't want to leave their "community'.
I like Manhatten, but i'd be a fool and starve to death if I moved there and tried to survive.

[NorthYorker]

????Eye exam is $200. Root canal is a $1000. Any dental job in general is $$$. Drugs? A week's worth of prescription antibiotic can be $100+

Furniture?

[rems]

True, if someone is on a fixed income or government handouts, why are they living in one of the most expensive cities in north America? Move to Beaverton, thunder bay or Timmins or something and cry me a river. Lots of nice places other than the ethnic ghettos of the GTA.
Housing, Like any other product, is something that should be based on what you can afford.

How's it like living in the suburbs without a car? If you're trying to go to work or even just do groceries, it's easier in a dense urban city if you don't have a car.

[BananaHunter]

How's it like living in the suburbs without a car? If you're trying to go to work or even just do groceries, it's easier in a dense urban city if you don't have a car.

True. But living in the suburbs is still cheaper. Many non-GTA cities have public transit which isn't terribly expensive. A car is far from a necessity.

[BananaHunter]

Eye exam is $200. Root canal is a $1000. Any dental job in general is $$$. Drugs? A week's worth of prescription antibiotic can be $100+

Furniture?

It's not like you have health checkups every month. If you're paying $200 for an eye exam you're probably getting ripped off or visiting a "premium optometrist". Furniture is not a necessity. I'd also add that you can buy incredibly cheap furniture at GoodWill. I don't think anything you listed a valid "living" expenses. Aside from not being frequent expenses, people have lived for centuries without these things.

When poverty is discussed, such items shouldn't even come into the picture. Poverty is about not having enough food on the table or clothes to stay warm. It's not about having the right to walk down the street with $500 sunglasses or having the perfect shiny set of teeth. I think people who advocate poverty is a serious issue in Canada have no basis. This particular quarter of Toronto residents have living standards that are significantly above that of MANY other countries. The article's author is a moron with a leftist agenda. I firmly believe people need to learn to take care of their financial destiny rather than expect to be spoon fed by the government. The real story of poverty in Canada is debt and piss poor financial decisions by nearsighted people who spend beyond their means in their younger years and suffer in their later years.

[manmanny]

True, if someone is on a fixed income or government handouts, why are they living in one of the most expensive cities in north America? Move to Beaverton, thunder bay or Timmins or something and cry me a river. Lots of nice places other than the ethnic ghettos of the GTA.
Housing, Like any other product, is something that should be based on what you can afford.

I was just reading that article. And the comments section.

Its funny how the comments here and at star are similar. Even the one posting about Jobs availability in certain areas.
Also in article Ward 28 has more %. Like 40%.
Before getting political and Rehan posting political comments. This is what star do and does.
A clear agenda of policies and how money is spent, policies, government is responsible and should get involved.

[Simaahoy]

Too many ghetto areas in downtown toronto area smh. Always see homeless people hanging out at city hall and other areas like in Dundas Square.Toronto is the only place where I got asked spare change at 8pm at night.

[flashy_mcflash]

Toronto is the only place where I got asked spare change at 8pm at night.

Have you visited any other major cities? This is hardly a unique phenomenon to Toronto.

[Aznsilvrboy]

Have you visited any other major cities? This is hardly a unique phenomenon to Toronto.

In recent times I've been to Beijing, Seoul, Taipei, Toronto, and Montreal and no one's ever asked me for change in the day or night. But a hobo did steal my chicken when I was eating with my gf in KFC (just grabbed it and took off). By the way OP, the United States Census Bureau officially classifies half of all Americans to be low-income or in poverty. Do you still think America is an advanced country?

[Simaahoy]

Have you visited any other major cities? This is hardly a unique phenomenon to Toronto.

Been to even the poorest countries, never encountered that. I think the worst experience I ever had with homeless people was Italy in but i think they were illegals.

[manmanny]

In recent times I've been to Beijing, Seoul, Taipei, Toronto, and Montreal and no one's ever asked me for change in the day or night. But a hobo did steal my chicken when I was eating with my gf in KFC (just grabbed it and took off). By the way OP, the United States Census Bureau officially classifies half of all Americans to be low-income or in poverty. Do you still think America is an advanced country?

Ouch.

[NorthYorker]

It's not like you have health checkups every month.Nope, but a root canal and couple of dental jobs in a year would set you back $200/mo this year.

Furniture is not a necessity. I'd also add that you can buy incredibly cheap furniture at GoodWill.Agree about Goodwill, but furniture IS a necessity, at least a bed and some sort of table.
I don't think anything you listed a valid "living" expenses. Aside from not being frequent expenses, people have lived for centuries without these things.Wait till you hit 40. Then you might suddenly realize that drugs can be a frequent living expense (for example, if you have diabetes, high blood pressure, heart condition, and substandard diet poor people tend to have does wonders to destroy one's body).
When poverty is discussed, such items shouldn't even come into the picture. Poverty is about not having enough food on the table or clothes to stay warm.It all depends on definition. Your definition of poverty is more or less "poor should friggin die before they are 50". This is significantly below widely used Canadian definition "poverty should not seriously affect your life expectancy". But no worries. We're going exactly the direction you propose.

[NorthYorker]

.Toronto is the only place where I got asked spare change at 8pm at night.Yes, in most other 1 mln+ cities they demand, and you're happy to oblige just to keep your body unharmed.

[flashy_mcflash]

In recent times I've been to Beijing, Seoul, Taipei, Toronto, and Montreal and no one's ever asked me for change in the day or night. But a hobo did steal my chicken when I was eating with my gf in KFC (just grabbed it and took off). By the way OP, the United States Census Bureau officially classifies half of all Americans to be low-income or in poverty. Do you still think America is an advanced country?


Been to even the poorest countries, never encountered that. I think the worst experience I ever had with homeless people was Italy in but i think they were illegals.

I've definitely been asked for change at night in Montreal. Definitely in New York, Bangkok, San Fran, London, and Paris. I don't think I was asked in Italy but we were cautioned to be extra cautious about pickpockets (Bangkok too, actually).

[Simaahoy]

Yes, in most other 1 mln+ cities they demand, and you're happy to oblige just to keep your body unharmed.

A friend of mine got mugged in Toronto by thugs, after asking them for directions. Hobos may not be dangerous but certain others are.

[rems]

True. But living in the suburbs is still cheaper. Many non-GTA cities have public transit which isn't terribly expensive. A car is far from a necessity.

It's not necessary but you'd be wasting a lot of time travelling if you didn't have one. Suburbs were built around having a car.

Plus Toronto has more social services available.

[divx]

So what's the problem? We will always have people living in poverty, I've lived in poverty for most of my life so far, if you feel strongly about it then lower the poverty line so only hobos counts as living in poverty.

[Syne]

So what's the problem? We will always have people living in poverty, I've lived in poverty for most of my life so far, if you feel strongly about it then lower the poverty line so only hobos counts as living in poverty.

That's your big solution? Lower the bar?

I don't know what's worse, the fact that you want to dress up poverty like lipstick on a pig, or the fact that you think redefining poverty to 3rd world standards is the best way forward.

[Mysticdragon]

That's your big solution? Lower the bar?

I don't know what's worse, the fact that you want to dress up poverty like lipstick on a pig, or the fact that you think redefining poverty to 3rd world standards is the best way forward.

I think he may have been being sarcastic?

Anywho.. I don't know how expensive it is exactly to live in Toronto. I know many friends who moved there for jobs because there are none in North Bay.

Going by rent here in North Bay.
A shared room in a house will run you about 550$ Some include utilities, most don't.
A 1 bedroom will run you between 650-1000$/month. The high end usually includes heat. Rarely includes hydro.
A 2 bedroom will be between 700- 1300$. Again the range depends on the location and condition of the apartment.
Anything over a 2 bedroom will be well over 1000$. usually 1k for a dump and 1500+ for something nice.

I would consider living in a 1 bedroom in a crap hole for 500$/month to be at the poverty line, but that's just my opinion.

Some people also forgot utilities. They included rent but I doubt rent in Toronto includes all utilities at 600$/month.
So add Heat, Hydro, Water (depending on the landlords setup) and a phone. I consider phone basic phone to be a requirement for contracting work, emergencies etc..


Still 27k seems like a high number. But I've never lived in Toronto :S

[flashy_mcflash]

I think he may have been being sarcastic?

Anywho.. I don't know how expensive it is exactly to live in Toronto. I know many friends who moved there for jobs because there are none in North Bay.

Going by rent here in North Bay.
A shared room in a house will run you about 550$ Some include utilities, most don't.
A 1 bedroom will run you between 650-1000$/month. The high end usually includes heat. Rarely includes hydro.
A 2 bedroom will be between 700- 1300$. Again the range depends on the location and condition of the apartment.
Anything over a 2 bedroom will be well over 1000$. usually 1k for a dump and 1500+ for something nice.

I would consider living in a 1 bedroom in a crap hole for 500$/month to be at the poverty line, but that's just my opinion.

Some people also forgot utilities. They included rent but I doubt rent in Toronto includes all utilities at 600$/month.
So add Heat, Hydro, Water (depending on the landlords setup) and a phone. I consider phone basic phone to be a requirement for contracting work, emergencies etc..


Still 27k seems like a high number. But I've never lived in Toronto :S

Wow, had no idea rents were that high in North Bay. That's not that far off from even downtown Toronto prices.

[divx]

That's your big solution? Lower the bar?

I don't know what's worse, the fact that you want to dress up poverty like lipstick on a pig, or the fact that you think redefining poverty to 3rd world standards is the best way forward.

our definition of poverty as someone pointed out is $27k a year, which means for the most part of my life so far I've lived in poverty, yet I didn't feel like I lived in poverty, if I didn't have high aims in life I'd be ok with $27k.

[divx]

I think he may have been being sarcastic?

Anywho.. I don't know how expensive it is exactly to live in Toronto. I know many friends who moved there for jobs because there are none in North Bay.

Going by rent here in North Bay.
A shared room in a house will run you about 550$ Some include utilities, most don't.
A 1 bedroom will run you between 650-1000$/month. The high end usually includes heat. Rarely includes hydro.
A 2 bedroom will be between 700- 1300$. Again the range depends on the location and condition of the apartment.
Anything over a 2 bedroom will be well over 1000$. usually 1k for a dump and 1500+ for something nice.

I would consider living in a 1 bedroom in a crap hole for 500$/month to be at the poverty line, but that's just my opinion.

Some people also forgot utilities. They included rent but I doubt rent in Toronto includes all utilities at 600$/month.
So add Heat, Hydro, Water (depending on the landlords setup) and a phone. I consider phone basic phone to be a requirement for contracting work, emergencies etc..


Still 27k seems like a high number. But I've never lived in Toronto :S

I've lived in Toronto and survived on less, so I don't see any problems. Syne just want to have his cake and eat it too.

[Mysticdragon]

Wow, had no idea rents were that high in North Bay. That's not that far off from even downtown Toronto prices.

Ya, I have no idea why people agree to pay those prices. Crazyness.
Most people I know who rent get a 3 bedroom and share it with friends to make it affordable.

[flashy_mcflash]

our definition of poverty as someone pointed out is $27k a year, which means for the most part of my life so far I've lived in poverty, yet I didn't feel like I lived in poverty, if I didn't have high aims in life I'd be ok with $27k.

The poverty line isn't a magic number pulled out of the air. It is the number at which MOST PEOPLE could not survive comfortably. There will always be people that can live on less, but you probably don't have kids or health problems or anything.

[divx]

The poverty line isn't a magic number pulled out of the air. It is the number at which MOST PEOPLE could not survive comfortably. There will always be people that can live on less, but you probably don't have kids or health problems or anything.

If I couldn't even feed myself, why would I have kids? And if I did then I can go ahead and blame you or the government? Health care is free, and you can qualify for drug assistance plan if you are poor. The reason Canada is the best in the world is that it takes a complete buffoon to screw up.

[flashy_mcflash]

If I couldn't even feed myself, why would I have kids? And if I did then I can go ahead and blame you or the government? Health care is free, and you can qualify for drug assistance plan if you are poor. The reason Canada is the best in the world is that it takes a complete buffoon to screw up.

Yet there you were, making poverty wages for most of your life like a chump. What sort of buffoonery led to that circumstance?

[RolandCouch]

Yet there you were, making poverty wages for most of your life like a chump. What sort of buffoonery led to that circumstance?

Stupid post is stupid.

I worked and was making less than 27K throughout university and had all of your usual day to day expenses PLUS university tuition and books (lets say conservative estimate of 5K total for both) that I was paying and I still had money left over.

The problem is not that people are hard done by, the problem is that people choose to live beyond their means and think that they are entitled to everything they want.

[NorthYorker]

I worked and was making less than 27K throughout university and had all of your usual day to day expenses PLUS university tuition and books (lets say conservative estimate of 5K total for both) that I was paying and I still had money left over.1. If tuition cost is any indication, that was close to a decade ago. I suspect poverty indicators were different then.
2. "Poor student" lifestyle means essentially spending more of your "health capital" than you're earning. You're sacrificing your health to lower costs, and it works temporarily due to great adaptability of human body. However, living this life permanently means exhausting your reserves and not replenishing them. In a layman terms, one who lives his/her whole life like this is unlikely to live until 50.

[RolandCouch]

1. If tuition cost is any indication, that was close to a decade ago. I suspect poverty indicators were different then.
2. "Poor student" lifestyle means essentially spending more of your "health capital" than you're earning. You're sacrificing your health to lower costs, and it works temporarily due to great adaptability of human body. However, living this life permanently means exhausting your reserves and not replenishing them. In a layman terms, one who lives his/her whole life like this is unlikely to live until 50.

I said conservative estimate of 5K, and I was being quite conservative. The last time I was in school was 3 years ago, so I doubt the poverty indicators were much different. Let's even factor in 3% annually for inflation since then (though that is again working in favour of your argument as 3% is high) that would put the line around 24,500 a few years ago. I was still spending probably less than 20K per year - why can't these people if I and so many other can manage on less when we are paying an additional major expense like education?

Your second point is moot because that is hardly the 'poor student' lifestyle. I had a great time and was not sacrificing my health at all. I was getting proper sleep, had time to go out with friends, participated in sports/recreation and was generally very content during this time - hardly 'exhausting reserves' by living this way.

I see you ignored the last part of my previous post which is ultimately the problem: "The problem is not that people are hard done by, the problem is that people choose to live beyond their means and think that they are entitled to everything they want."

[divx]

Yet there you were, making poverty wages for most of your life like a chump. What sort of buffoonery led to that circumstance?

I didn't like to be poor so I did something about it, now I'm not poor.

[divx]

1. If tuition cost is any indication, that was close to a decade ago. I suspect poverty indicators were different then.
2. "Poor student" lifestyle means essentially spending more of your "health capital" than you're earning. You're sacrificing your health to lower costs, and it works temporarily due to great adaptability of human body. However, living this life permanently means exhausting your reserves and not replenishing them. In a layman terms, one who lives his/her whole life like this is unlikely to live until 50.

You can't force them to be rich though, and I believe people have the right to be poor. I was poor too so I understand, it sucks, so I decided to become richer.

[DearSummer]

Who cares how many people live in some arbitrary circumstance that bureaucrats say is poverty? We should always be looking for ways to increase the standard of living of people. Nobody disputes this. We should be talking about ANSWERS, not debating how much money somebody needs to not be poor (whatever that means).

[LisaB]

The article says that those on Ontario Works couldn't survive half a year if they were living at the poverty line of $18,759 (don't know where people are getting the $27k figure from). Remember, a single person on social assistance is only making $8,145.96 annually. That works out to $22.31 a day for everything for the year. The after tax LICO is $18,759, which works out to $51.39 a day for all your expenses, to be considered living at the poverty line. The $8,145.96 in annual social assistance income only covers 158.5 days (roughly 5 months) in a calendar year at the poverty line rate of $51.39 per day.

I agree that there might be individuals who mismanage their money and are on social assistance or are "poor". But, I also know first hand that the people most likely to mismanage their money and end up in debt are those with healthy incomes. Money management skills are not something only the poor lack. And, the fact remains: It is impossible to live in Ontario on Ontario Works.

Room for rent in Beaverton $500 month/$6000 annually: http://toronto.en.craigslist.ca/drh/roo/3073751197.html

Groceries (food) - let's say $160 month/$1920 annually: http://oafb.ca/assets/pdfs/A_Gathering_Storm.pdf (It's on page 9...but this link only factors in food...not toiletries or laundry supplies. For those, see below)

Health/Toiletries/Laundry detergent - let's say $20 month/$240 annually

Prescriptions - $0, since OW recipients have their meds paid for: http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/en/mcss/programs/social/ow/help/benefits/health_benefits.aspx

Add it all up and it's all $8,160, a short fall of $14.04 from the $8,145.96 OW pays out. And, we haven't factored in clothes, gifts, savings or entertainment yet (yes, they're still human, they need some form of cheap entertainment). Please, if these people were making 27k like others have suggested, then they'd be stupid to work. I certainly wouldn't if I was single and had no education where I could make more money.

ETA: For those who want to see the Destitution Day Methodology, click here: http://www.socialplanningtoronto.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Action-on-Poverty-Profile-Dday-info.pdf

[starboy869]

Like it was said before no idea where $27k figure came from. However if welfare was handing out $27k a year then everyone would be on it. $27k a year to sit on your ***** and do nothing? Fuvk where I sign... I would be the first in line.

The correct figure is just under $9k for a welfare claimant yearly income.

[Mr. Robo]

I wonder how many people who are living the good life are in serious debt.

[LisaB]

Like it was said before no idea where $27k figure came from. However if welfare was handing out $27k a year then everyone would be on it. $27k a year to sit on your ***** and do nothing? Fuvk where I sign... I would be the first in line.

The correct figure is just under $9k for a welfare claimant yearly income.

Exactly!!! If you were to work 40 hours at $10.25/hour, you'd only make $21,320 annually. That's $19,003 after taxes, according to this site: http://lsminsurance.ca/calculators/canada/income-tax

Seriously, if welfare was paying more than a full-time, minimum-wage job, don't you think more people would apply and be in receipt of it???

[LisaB]

The poverty line was put at 27K...with 18K of that in wages which is taxed at about $2K.
Are the 8K in social assistance taxable?

and the $22.5 I think is for living pretty decent I think, at least for a younger person.

I'm sorry, but you have it completely wrong, and I think this is why others in this thread think it's 27k. The poverty line is 18k, not 27. The poverty line, as flashy_mcflash has already stated, is the cut-off where individuals cannot survive comfortably. Social assistance pays 8k annually. However, if you decide to work while on Ontario Works, OW deducts $0.50 for every dollar you earn in waged labour http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/en/mcss/programs/social/ow/client/earning_money.aspx

Social assistance payments are taxable as regular income. So, if you work while on OW, you don't get the full 8k. It's impossible for someone to earn 18k and get the maximum amount of social assistance. Please, I mean no offence, but think about it a little bit. If you work and earn 18k, then you're just under the poverty line. Do you really think OW will give you the same amount of money as someone who is not working at all?

[fibonacci]

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWW

Unbelievable just how many clueless people are here, trying to rationalize the reasons behind this crisis.

It's because of the CURRENCY DEVALUATION that is going on in Ottawa.......... get it through your heads.

It's the policy that is keeping interest rates too low for too long.

It's the currency war that is going on ---propping up that piece of sht currency....the USD .



Please go educate yourselves.


The reason why a lot of Canadians are struggling right now is because of a monolithic service sector that is getting sweet deals from the gov at the expense of the manufacturing/R&D sector.


In order to raise our standard of living, we need to PRODUCE and MANUFACTURE more. We need to invent/innovate/engineer something new. Just like Japan and other Asian nations.


The service sector siphons off wealth and puts it in the wrong places, like giving it to businesses who build up luxurious condos trying to flip it. This is only possible because they have gov-issued monopolies to access the money printing press at a much lower interest rate than any other sector. They print a lot then lend it out and charge interest on other Canadians and then profit from the margins. Stop this policy, and Canada will have a booming economy right now.....and banking would NOT be the most profitable sector in our economy.

[stuntman]

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWW

Unbelievable just how many clueless people are here, trying to rationalize the reasons behind this crisis.
.
.
.
....and banking would NOT be the most profitable sector in our economy.

They are not they are staying on topic and discussing the expenses of a person with a low income and their standard of living. You are again making stuff up.

Is your other nick Hitman21? What is your other nick?

[stuntman]

Who cares how many people live in some arbitrary circumstance that bureaucrats say is poverty? We should always be looking for ways to increase the standard of living of people. Nobody disputes this. We should be talking about ANSWERS, not debating how much money somebody needs to not be poor (whatever that means).

^^^political post. not allowed.

OK fibonacci...this guy is one person that is on your wavelength.

[stuntman]

I'm sorry, but you have it completely wrong, and I think this is why others in this thread think it's 27k. The poverty line is 18k, not 27. The poverty line, as flashy_mcflash has already stated, is the cut-off where individuals cannot survive comfortably. Social assistance pays 8k annually. However, if you decide to work while on Ontario Works, OW deducts $0.50 for every dollar you earn in waged labour http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/en/mcss/programs/social/ow/client/earning_money.aspx

Social assistance payments are taxable as regular income. So, if you work while on OW, you don't get the full 8k. It's impossible for someone to earn 18k and get the maximum amount of social assistance. Please, I mean no offence, but think about it a little bit. If you work and earn 18k, then you're just under the poverty line. Do you really think OW will give you the same amount of money as someone who is not working at all?

The thing the thread is trying to work out is.....what is it like to be on the poverty line. Maybe it IS comfortable.
If you live in Toronto it is likely more expensive than living elsewhere.

The article was a little unclear...thanks for pointing that there is an issue with the number.
So what is the maximum number AFTER taxes? 18K plus 4K minus taxes??

[LisaB]

The thing the thread is trying to work out is.....what is it like to be on the poverty line. Maybe it IS comfortable.
If you live in Toronto it is likely more expensive than living elsewhere.

The article was a little unclear...thanks for pointing that there is an issue with the number.
So what is the maximum number AFTER taxes? 18K plus 4K minus taxes??

18k after taxes is $16,349 in Ontario according to http://lsminsurance.ca/calculators/canada/income-tax

[stuntman]

18k after taxes is $16,349 in Ontario according to http://lsminsurance.ca/calculators/canada/income-tax

OK....so what is the amount of after tax income for the top end that the reporter is talking about?

[LisaB]

OK....so what is the amount of after tax income for the top end that the reporter is talking about?

$21,000 after tax is $18,747. Forty hours at $10.25 is $21,320 pre-tax (but, of course, deduct a bit for breaks) So, in other words, a full-time minimum wage salary after taxes is around the poverty line.

[stuntman]

No....not what the poverty line is....I can look that up on google.

What is the number the reporter is talking about when it comes to 18K and 8K in benefits?
Do the two get added together? It sounds like he is including people that are below the poverty line but get benefits to bring them above it. What is the max number he is talking about?

[LisaB]

No....not what the poverty line is....I can look that up on google.

What is the number the reporter is talking about when it comes to 18K and 8K in benefits?
Do the two get added together? It sounds like he is including people that are below the poverty line but get benefits to bring them above it. What is the max number he is talking about?

They're two different things. Anyone making under 18k is considered to be living under the poverty line. If a single person is receiving social assistance, he/she is earning 8k annually in taxable income, also considered to be living below the poverty line. They are not added together. The poverty line is an invisible line that separates those who live under it v.s. those who are above it. In order to be considered above the poverty line, one must make over 18k annually, be it through work or social assistance/pension. That's why he says a quarter of Toronto residents live in poverty...because their salary is less than 18k, thus they are below the poverty line.

Now, granted, some people can live quite comfortably with less than 18k, especially if they don't have many expenses (live rent-free at home with parents etc etc).

[fibonacci]

No....not what the poverty line is....I can look that up on google.

What is the number the reporter is talking about when it comes to 18K and 8K in benefits?
Do the two get added together? It sounds like he is including people that are below the poverty line but get benefits to bring them above it. What is the max number he is talking about?

MAN who the HELL cares what the poverty line is??????????


The AVERAGE man with just a high-school degree should be making 60000 dollars a year right now....... not 18K or 20K or whatever the hell # you're obsessed about.


When you adjust for inflation, 60 K CAD was the amount that the average man was making in the 50s.

Plus they could afford to have a family with many kids. The wife and kids were enjoying leisure. The kids had a full-time mother who would feed them and raise them.



So stop arguing about pointless s*t that doesn't matter....... like I said in the other thread, go read some books on basic economics.

[stuntman]

^^^just about everyone that posted in this thread.

Shoudn't you have a mega-thread somewhere. You can start one you know.

What is your other nick? You have not answered. I have asked many times. Hitman? a-tree? other?? ?

[LisaB]

MAN who the HELL cares what the poverty line is??????????


The AVERAGE man with just a high-school degree should be making 60000 dollars a year right now....... not 18K or 20K or whatever the hell # you're obsessed about.


When you adjust for inflation, 60 K CAD was the amount that the average man was making in the 50s.

Plus they could afford to have a family with many kids. The wife and kids were enjoying leisure. The kids had a full-time mother who would feed them and raise them.



So stop arguing about pointless s*t that doesn't matter....... like I said in the other thread, go read some books on basic economics.

Wow, for someone who knows so much about basic economics, you'd think you would have a grasp on the simplest of economic theories...supply and demand.

There were less workers in the 50s than there are today. As you pointed out, women weren't predominately employed outside the home during the 50s, and Canada wasn't the 33 million people it is today. There are more workers in the labour force today, and the average today is not a high school education like it was in the 50s. Hence why the cost of labour is what it is today...supply and demand.

[stuntman]

Wow, for someone who knows so much about basic economics, you'd think you would have a grasp on the simplest of economic theories...supply and demand.

There were less workers in the 50s than there are today. Don't forget, women weren't predominately employed outside the home during the 50s, and Canada wasn't the 33 million people it is today. There are more workers in the labour force today, and the average today is not a high school education like it was in the 50s. Hence why the cost of labour is what it is today...supply and demand.

Danger! Dont feed him.....he will go on about how the economy caused women to go into the workforce. It is like giving a cat catnip....all roads lead to......insanity

[LisaB]

Danger! Dont feed him.....he will go on about how the economy caused women to go into the workforce. It is like giving a cat catnip....all roads lead to......insanity

Hehehe will keep in mind :D

[fibonacci]

.....you'd think you would have a grasp on the simplest of economic theories...supply and demand.

There were less workers in the 50s than there are today....

That is one of the most ridiculous proposition I've ever heard in my life.

By your logic, "PEI should have the highest percentage of wealthy individuals than any province, because they have the least number of workers than any other province." : /

Now that's a ludicrous statement.

I suggest you go through some of my previous posts, to get a better picture as to why we no longer have a wealthy society.

And it has nothing to do with having more Human capital. Just look at the Chinese economy..... Chinese citizens are making much more today than they were in the 50s...... and today there are 1.3 billion of them, while in the 50s they had around 500 million.

[divx]

The article says that those on Ontario Works couldn't survive half a year if they were living at the poverty line of $18,759 (don't know where people are getting the $27k figure from). Remember, a single person on social assistance is only making $8,145.96 annually. That works out to $22.31 a day for everything for the year. The after tax LICO is $18,759, which works out to $51.39 a day for all your expenses, to be considered living at the poverty line. The $8,145.96 in annual social assistance income only covers 158.5 days (roughly 5 months) in a calendar year at the poverty line rate of $51.39 per day.

I agree that there might be individuals who mismanage their money and are on social assistance or are "poor". But, I also know first hand that the people most likely to mismanage their money and end up in debt are those with healthy incomes. Money management skills are not something only the poor lack. And, the fact remains: It is impossible to live in Ontario on Ontario Works.

Room for rent in Beaverton $500 month/$6000 annually: http://toronto.en.craigslist.ca/drh/roo/3073751197.html

Groceries (food) - let's say $160 month/$1920 annually: http://oafb.ca/assets/pdfs/A_Gathering_Storm.pdf (It's on page 9...but this link only factors in food...not toiletries or laundry supplies. For those, see below)

Health/Toiletries/Laundry detergent - let's say $20 month/$240 annually

Prescriptions - $0, since OW recipients have their meds paid for: http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/en/mcss/programs/social/ow/help/benefits/health_benefits.aspx

Add it all up and it's all $8,160, a short fall of $14.04 from the $8,145.96 OW pays out. And, we haven't factored in clothes, gifts, savings or entertainment yet (yes, they're still human, they need some form of cheap entertainment). Please, if these people were making 27k like others have suggested, then they'd be stupid to work. I certainly wouldn't if I was single and had no education where I could make more money.

ETA: For those who want to see the Destitution Day Methodology, click here: http://www.socialplanningtoronto.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Action-on-Poverty-Profile-Dday-info.pdf

you can make more money than that on minimum wage with a mcdee job, and who can't get a mcdee job? Regardless, I've survived with less than $18k before so it can be done. The purpose of social assistance is to help the poor live, keep them alive until they can get richer. I'm not gonna argue that living at the bare minimum sucks, which is what prompted me to try to acquire as much money as quickly as possible. You need to give people motivation to better themselves.

[divx]

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWW

Unbelievable just how many clueless people are here, trying to rationalize the reasons behind this crisis.

It's because of the CURRENCY DEVALUATION that is going on in Ottawa.......... get it through your heads.

It's the policy that is keeping interest rates too low for too long.

It's the currency war that is going on ---propping up that piece of sht currency....the USD .



Please go educate yourselves.


The reason why a lot of Canadians are struggling right now is because of a monolithic service sector that is getting sweet deals from the gov at the expense of the manufacturing/R&D sector.


In order to raise our standard of living, we need to PRODUCE and MANUFACTURE more. We need to invent/innovate/engineer something new. Just like Japan and other Asian nations.


The service sector siphons off wealth and puts it in the wrong places, like giving it to businesses who build up luxurious condos trying to flip it. This is only possible because they have gov-issued monopolies to access the money printing press at a much lower interest rate than any other sector. They print a lot then lend it out and charge interest on other Canadians and then profit from the margins. Stop this policy, and Canada will have a booming economy right now.....and banking would NOT be the most profitable sector in our economy.

Japan can't be used as an example, their economy isn't that great, and their national debt is over 200% of GDP, surpasses the likes of Greece. Yes, we need to produce more things, you can't just consume and not produce, while we don't have the labor base to mass produce, we make up in technology and smart people. I don't know why we don't have a manufacture base for high tech and technology based production, maybe something to do with government regulation and unions.

[manmanny]

MAN who the HELL cares what the poverty line is??????????


The AVERAGE man with just a high-school degree should be making 60000 dollars a year right now....... not 18K or 20K or whatever the hell # you're obsessed about.


When you adjust for inflation, 60 K CAD was the amount that the average man was making in the 50s.

Plus they could afford to have a family with many kids. The wife and kids were enjoying leisure. The kids had a full-time mother who would feed them and raise them.



So stop arguing about pointless sht that doesn't matter....... like I said in the other thread, go read some books on basic economics.


^^^just about everyone that posted in this thread.

Shoudn't you have a mega-thread somewhere. You can start one you know.

What is your other nick? You have not answered. I have asked many times. Hitman? a-tree? other?? ?

The fibonacci guy makes Mr.Kap so so normal. Mods are useless to catch/warn these people

[anyasok]

The problem with poverty is that people are poor whether they are on OW or working full-time at minimum or slightly above that wages. That's the real crisis. Working full time and doing nothing is looked on similarly, thus it begs the question, why bother?

[Applecart]

Too many ghetto areas in downtown toronto area smh. Always see homeless people hanging out at city hall and other areas like in Dundas Square.Toronto is the only place where I got asked spare change at 8pm at night.

I guess you have never been to Montreal. The downtown core, along the St. Catherine Avenue, is full of beggars who are perfectly bilingual.

[divx]

^every country have homeless people, we are doing the best as they are only visible in few cities. It simply does not matter how many people are living in poverty here or elsewhere, the important thing is that society have given people the opportunity to succeed, if they mess up then it's their own fault and deserve to be poor for the rest of their lives.

[Montague]

^every country have homeless people.
And some cities will likely always have more because of the relatively mild weather (re: Vancouver).

[r1lee]

If I couldn't even feed myself, why would I have kids?

that's a good question. That's just the way it is, less affluent families usualy end up having more children.

[Soda Popinski]

The article is pretty accurate. I'm not sure why people are bashing the author and claiming that people can get by on $27k/year by living in a run down building and consuming the bare minimum. This is what poor people do and why they're defined as poor. While it's true that some people are bad at managing their own budget and there are also some people who spend money on things they can't afford, the majority of poor people are poor because they don't earn enough money and they're forced to live in bad neighbourhoods.

Someone else brought up the fact that dental work is very expensive. He's right, especially if you don't have any insurance. If you have a bad, low paying job then the odds are high that your employer doesn't offer dental & medical insurance. Root canals, cavities, even a basic cleaning cost a lot of money. If you get sick and require medication then that will set you back quite a bit too and if you're living paycheque to paycheque and don't have any savings to dip into, you've got major problems.

The growing disparity between the rich and the poor is a huge problem and it's creating societal problems that essentially affect all of us. Although people (rich or poor) shouldn't be absolved from blame if they create their own financial problems by living beyond their means, they should also be assisted if they've done their best to manage their finances and still aren't able to keep their head above water.

Let's be realistic; cost of living has continued to skyrocket yet the wages for the lower class have stagnated. This is the crux of the problem. Just like governments need revenue in order to balance their budget, we all need revenue in order to balance ours and if our wages do not increase at the same level of the cost of living then something has to give.

Minimum wage should be set to a minimum of $15/hr and that amount should be even higher for companies who make more than $5 million in net income per year. There has to be a better balance otherwise poverty rates will spiral out of control.

[DearSummer]

The article is pretty accurate. I'm not sure why people are bashing the author and claiming that people can get by on $27k/year by living in a run down building and consuming the bare minimum. This is what poor people do and why they're defined as poor. While it's true that some people are bad at managing their own budget and there are also some people who spend money on things they can't afford, the majority of poor people are poor because they don't earn enough money and they're forced to live in bad neighbourhoods.

Someone else brought up the fact that dental work is very expensive. He's right, especially if you don't have any insurance. If you have a bad, low paying job then the odds are high that your employer doesn't offer dental & medical insurance. Root canals, cavities, even a basic cleaning cost a lot of money. If you get sick and require medication then that will set you back quite a bit too and if you're living paycheque to paycheque and don't have any savings to dip into, you've got major problems.

The growing disparity between the rich and the poor is a huge problem and it's creating societal problems that essentially affect all of us. Although people (rich or poor) shouldn't be absolved from blame if they create their own financial problems by living beyond their means, they should also be assisted if they've done their best to manage their finances and still aren't able to keep their head above water.

Let's be realistic; cost of living has continued to skyrocket yet the wages for the lower class have stagnated. This is the crux of the problem. Just like governments need revenue in order to balance their budget, we all need revenue in order to balance ours and if our wages do not increase at the same level of the cost of living then something has to give.

Minimum wage should be set to a minimum of $15/hr and that amount should be even higher for companies who make more than $5 million in net income per year. There has to be a better balance otherwise poverty rates will spiral out of control.

A higher minimum wage will just destroy jobs and bar more people from their right to earn a living, while simultaneously swelling up the welfare roll. Terrible idea. Minimum wage should be abolished.

[RolandCouch]

The article is pretty accurate. I'm not sure why people are bashing the author and claiming that people can get by on $27k/year by living in a run down building and consuming the bare minimum. This is what poor people do and why they're defined as poor. While it's true that some people are bad at managing their own budget and there are also some people who spend money on things they can't afford, the majority of poor people are poor because they don't earn enough money and they're forced to live in bad neighbourhoods.

Someone else brought up the fact that dental work is very expensive. He's right, especially if you don't have any insurance. If you have a bad, low paying job then the odds are high that your employer doesn't offer dental & medical insurance. Root canals, cavities, even a basic cleaning cost a lot of money. If you get sick and require medication then that will set you back quite a bit too and if you're living paycheque to paycheque and don't have any savings to dip into, you've got major problems.

The growing disparity between the rich and the poor is a huge problem and it's creating societal problems that essentially affect all of us. Although people (rich or poor) shouldn't be absolved from blame if they create their own financial problems by living beyond their means, they should also be assisted if they've done their best to manage their finances and still aren't able to keep their head above water.

Let's be realistic; cost of living has continued to skyrocket yet the wages for the lower class have stagnated. This is the crux of the problem. Just like governments need revenue in order to balance their budget, we all need revenue in order to balance ours and if our wages do not increase at the same level of the cost of living then something has to give.

Minimum wage should be set to a minimum of $15/hr and that amount should be even higher for companies who make more than $5 million in net income per year. There has to be a better balance otherwise poverty rates will spiral out of control.

On less than 27K a year I was able to afford all necessities, go out drinking, go on vacation, pay own tuition/books, pay for car, etc. and still have money left over.

Just because some people are irresponsible and bad with money doesn't mean we should feel sorry for them.

[divx]

that's a good question. That's just the way it is, less affluent families usualy end up having more children.

so we kept having low quality genes flooding the gene pool, good job Canada.

[divx]

The article is pretty accurate. I'm not sure why people are bashing the author and claiming that people can get by on $27k/year by living in a run down building and consuming the bare minimum. This is what poor people do and why they're defined as poor. While it's true that some people are bad at managing their own budget and there are also some people who spend money on things they can't afford, the majority of poor people are poor because they don't earn enough money and they're forced to live in bad neighbourhoods.

Someone else brought up the fact that dental work is very expensive. He's right, especially if you don't have any insurance. If you have a bad, low paying job then the odds are high that your employer doesn't offer dental & medical insurance. Root canals, cavities, even a basic cleaning cost a lot of money. If you get sick and require medication then that will set you back quite a bit too and if you're living paycheque to paycheque and don't have any savings to dip into, you've got major problems.

The growing disparity between the rich and the poor is a huge problem and it's creating societal problems that essentially affect all of us. Although people (rich or poor) shouldn't be absolved from blame if they create their own financial problems by living beyond their means, they should also be assisted if they've done their best to manage their finances and still aren't able to keep their head above water.

Let's be realistic; cost of living has continued to skyrocket yet the wages for the lower class have stagnated. This is the crux of the problem. Just like governments need revenue in order to balance their budget, we all need revenue in order to balance ours and if our wages do not increase at the same level of the cost of living then something has to give.

Minimum wage should be set to a minimum of $15/hr and that amount should be even higher for companies who make more than $5 million in net income per year. There has to be a better balance otherwise poverty rates will spiral out of control.
I could make some in soviet Russia jokes but those are getting old. People are not equal, minimum wage is merely pricing people out of work and creating inflation.

[flashy_mcflash]

A higher minimum wage will just destroy jobs and bar more people from their right to earn a living, while simultaneously swelling up the welfare roll. Terrible idea. Minimum wage should be abolished.

Or it will increase the amount of spending money in the hands of consumers, the real job creators (http://www.forbes.com/sites/johntharvey/2012/06/17/job-creators/).

[Syne]

A higher minimum wage will just destroy jobs and bar more people from their right to earn a living, while simultaneously swelling up the welfare roll. Terrible idea. Minimum wage should be abolished.

What's the difference between "right to earn a living" and "entitled to a job" other than one sounds better than the other?

Are you going to tell someone that they have a right to earn a living, but they don't have a right to the means to earn a living?

[a-tree]

What's the difference between "right to earn a living" and "entitled to a job" other than one sounds better than the other?

Are you going to tell someone that they have a right to earn a living, but they don't have a right to the means to earn a living?

Entitled to a job is believing that one should have a job regardless of their competence level, experience, etc, which basically is the conviction you hold as represented by many of your resentful posts against 'the man'. Right to earn a living in the context he's using, is basically saying minimum wage laws artificially removes jobs for people who would otherwise have them.

[NorthYorker]

I could make some in soviet Russia jokesJust FYI - quality of life in Russia went down the crapper immediately after it stopped being Soviet. And in some parts of former USSR it didn't recover yet (Russia proper reached late-1980 affluence sometime around 2007-2010).

[Syne]

Entitled to a job is believing that one should have a job regardless of their competence level, experience, etc, which basically is the conviction you hold as represented by many of your resentful posts against 'the man'. Right to earn a living in the context he's using, is basically saying minimum wage laws artificially removes jobs for people who would otherwise have them.

First of all, no DearSummer actually said that people have a right to earn a living, independent of minimum wage laws. He said, "A higher minimum wage will... ... bar more people from their right to earn a living." This suggests that people have a right to earn a living through wages. How do you earn a living through wages? A job. I didn't say it, he did. If people have a right to something, then that right exists regardless of competence and experience.

Also, take a look at who I quoted. Was it you? DearSummer is quite capable of answering his own questions. Despite my better judgment, I had to take you off ignore for a minute just to read your reply because I just knew you couldn't help yourself from butting in.

[a-tree]

First of all, no DearSummer actually said that people have a right to earn a living, independent of minimum wage laws. He said, "A higher minimum wage will... ... bar more people from their right to earn a living." This suggests that people have a right to earn a living through wages. How do you earn a living through wages? A job. I didn't say it, he did. If people have a right to something, then that right exists regardless of competence and experience.

Also, take a look at who I quoted. Was it you? DearSummer is quite capable of answering his own questions. Despite my better judgment, I had to take you off ignore for a minute just to read your reply because I just knew you couldn't help yourself from butting in.

Again, entitlement means deserving something unconditionally, which is the view you promote. "Right to earn a living" doesn't mean unconditional in the sense he's using the phrase here. What he means is that with minimum wage laws artificially removes jobs that would otherwise be there, which he expresses using the term 'right'. Just because two things apparently sound the same it doesn't mean they mean the same.

It's true that DS is capable of defending himself. But I just wanted the pleasure of putting you in your place.

[Kohanz]

First of all, no DearSummer actually said that people have a right to earn a living, independent of minimum wage laws. He said, "A higher minimum wage will... ... bar more people from their right to earn a living." This suggests that people have a right to earn a living through wages. How do you earn a living through wages? A job. I didn't say it, he did. If people have a right to something, then that right exists regardless of competence and experience.

You are making one big assumption: that the "job" has to be created by someone else. People have the right to earn a living. If they can't find employment via an enterprise created by someone else, they are free to create their own.

[Hitman21]

Something tells me these stats aren't accurate, the numbers must be fudged up to make the situation look bad. A quarter of the residents cant be in poverty :facepalm:

[Syne]

You are making one big assumption: that the "job" has to be created by someone else. People have the right to earn a living. If they can't find employment via an enterprise created by someone else, they are free to create their own.

If they create their own, then that wouldn't be a wage, would it.. and it would have nothing to do with minimum wage laws. DS said what he said in the context of wages earned.

For what it's worth, I agree that people aren't entitled to be paid by someone else, the idea is ridiculous. I'm simply pointing out the equally ridiculous no-win dichotomy on the conservative side of the post, that assumes that people are lazy if they don't have a job, but if they complain about not finding one, then they have a sense of entitlement. It's like you're automatically a piece of crap simply for being unemployed.

[Kohanz]

For what it's worth, I agree that people aren't entitled to be paid by someone else, the idea is ridiculous. I'm simply pointing out the equally ridiculous no-win dichotomy on the conservative side of the post, that assumes that people are lazy if they don't have a job, but if they complain about not finding one, then they have a sense of entitlement. It's like you're automatically a piece of crap simply for being unemployed.

I agree that for someone who is unemployed for a short period of time (say, up to 2 years or in that ballpark) that they could just be unlucky and that the system is not working for them. However, if a person is unemployed for a longer period of time (several years) at that point it is impossible not to become suspicious that the problem lies with them. At any give time, there are industries out there that are desperate for workers, so if after failing for years in one sector, there are so many other things to try in terms of re-training and switching industries.

Remember, the unemployment rate is what, 7, 8%? And that population is not all the same people - people are transitioning in and out of the group all the time. So if you stay a member of that group for many years, you are part of a select few and it's natural to examine why that relatively small group of people is in the situation they are in.