FYI:BMI Standards and Disability

What constitutes a living wage?

There are those on the forum that do not believe that is the responsibilty of the employer.

 

A living wage would provide enough money to cover the basic necessities of life -- a minimum standard of living, so to speak. Food, clothing, shelter, reasonable medical care...

If a disabled person can earn only a dollar or two an hour, how can that person be expected to provide for him/herself? If not the employer, the government? Perhaps a combination of the two? I don't know the answer.

Personally, I don't like any of these government subsidized programs. If I had my druthers, communities would take care of their own through locally administered charitable giving. That way we'd have a better sense of who really needs assistance and could appropriate available funds accordingly.

 

As far as work being available yes, that could be a bit problematic but, everybody has some challenge to overcome at some point. During the current economic situation, the availabilty of work is pretty spotty for many folks.

Besides, the OP never said that he couldn't drive any more. He said he was trying to get the "jump" - so to speak - on the possibility of his being a victim of CSA 2010. Which leads me to wonder; did the OP file for disability because he felt that he could no longer drive OR was he unemployed and sought disability as form of "permanent unemployment" rather than trying to go back to work under the spectre of CSA 2010?

As far as a living wage goes..... ummm .. no. The livibility of a wage is the employee's responsibility. However I would like to submit that if a person is working outside of their field because of a disability and, is making less than they would on disabilty, then disability could supplement their income accordingly. To me, this would be preferable to someone who is not genuinely debiltated collecting a full monthly payment for not working. Especially in a situation where the "disability" is self-inflicted and, could have been prevented by some self-moderation.


............ Jim

 

You posted this while I was posting above. All I can say is THANK YOU, I couldn't agree more.


........... Jim

 

I'd be interested in the OP's answer to your question. My guess is the latter. The government, in its attempts to regulate #### near every aspect of our lives, has made day-to-day living a game with its rolling priorities and ever-changing rules. I suspect the OP simply read the today's rules and decided to play it safe and assure himself a minimal income while he could. Being on disability does not rule out employment, but it does limit its extent.

 

The disability he signed up for does limit the option of other income. It is known more as SSI.

 

SSI does not allow a minimal amount of outside income? (I'm not being a smart-###. I honestly do not know.)

 

Oh yeah?
Why should welfare make up for walmart not paying their employees a living wage? Most walmart store workers are on welfare or food stamps...What's that mean? That means walmart is being subsidized by your tax money. Does walmart deserve that? HELL NO.

And besides that, what about in areas where places like walmart have driven everyone who pays a livable wage out? Like, where i live, there are basically no jobs that pay more than just barely enough to live.

That's why i started my own business.

 

Let's not get our apples and oranges confused here. First we are discussing disability not welfare. (though granted in some case the difference is virtually non-existant.) I would rather see someone work part time (if possible) and receive a partial disability payment than not work at all and get a full payment. However what you say about WalMart is absolutely true (for the most part) and I for one don't shop there at all for that and, many other reasons.

Along those lines ..... I never suggested that welfare should subsidize anyone fully capable of working.

I'll say it again - A living wage is the employee's responsibility. If you can't live on the wage you are making, get another job, move to a different area, increase your skill level through education and training, work two jobs etc.. What ever it takes. Expecting an employer to pay a living wage just because they give you a job is ... well unrealistic. The job market, to a huge extent, functions on supply and demand. The more skilled and valuable you are to the employer, the more likely you are to make a living wage. Establishing that skill and value is employees responsibility.

Well, drive WalMart out. People have, on one or two occasions prevented a Wally World from being built in their town for those very reasons. Granted at this point it would take a huge effort to send "the beast from Bentonville" to the bone yard but,....

BTW - good luck with your business - really.

......... Jim

eta - my family is originally from Michigan, Lansing, Alma and, Carson City. I'm all too familiar with the state of the economy there.

 

I'm 55 now....In thirty years I'll be 85 (or dead more than likely) The point I'm making is, Take care of yourself, excersize a little self control, get some excersize and actually think about what the effect of what you're doing now will have on you in the future and you'll be in better shape when you get to the end of those thirty years than you would if you didn't.

Imagine that...Another possibility that was not considered.

I like WalMart...