When I decided to leave work and start my own business, I thought:
- If I get to the point where I need gov't help, I'll just quit my business and get a job
- Gov't help isn't available for people like me anyway - we're just too awesome
My business is going, but I'm at the just before dawn stage:
- Not making enough to completely support my family
- Not enough free time to take a job, even part time, without essentially trashing my own business
- Making enough progress to know that things will get to sustainable levels, but it's slow going
So I've rationalized my position and am drawing on gov't resources (food and medical) despite the fact that I could go get a "real" job and fully support my family with no assistance.
In the meantime, though, I've become the person I used to rail against -an adult perfectly capable of working for my own and my family's support who chooses to use gov't support. I have rationalized my position, as in theory won't be doing this forever, but the end result is the same. In theory I could keep my income level at a stable $30k/year, and the gov't would provide another $20k-$40k in food and medical assistance on top of that because we're considered below the poverty line, and I could do so indefinitely (there is, apparently, no expiration to food (whole family) and medical (children only) benefits, like there is for income assistance, unemployment, and many other programs).
Now, we're not doing this without significant personal sacrifice, and my children are learning the value of money much more quickly than I did as a child. Financial strain is one of the major causes of divorce in the US, and I can understand why. Some of the conversations we've had about the tiniest expenses boggles my mind.
But I would never have characterized us as being in poverty. Further, while we're only using food and medical assistance right now, the gov't food budget for a family of my size is 3 times what our food budget was when I was making $90k/year. I've talked to a social scientist about this, and they pointed out that 1) the federal program does not account for regional cost of living differences, and 2) "healthy" food is generally more expensive than "quick and cheap" food. So the gov't program is really designed to support the ideal diet in a medium to expensive part of the country, but is applied to my family in a moderate cost of living area who already budgets food frugally. Ironically, we buy more junk food now than we did before (mmmmm, pizza rolls....) because we couldn't justify them on our previous budget, but also to some degree we are "making up" our other sacrifices by splurging on food. We can't justify the cost to take the kids to an amusement park, but they love being able to pick out their own treats and lunch (we would never buy lunchables or twinkies previously, so to the kids that type of packaged food is a big treat) on the way to a park.
tldr:
At what point should someone seek gov't assistance?
At what point do you think someone is abusing gov't assistance?
I've been reluctant to start this conversation for a variety of reasons, first and foremost is that I'm not asking for anything, so don't start thinking that this is a plea for anything other than an interesting discussion about social policies and how they should be perceived/used by citizens.
- If I get to the point where I need gov't help, I'll just quit my business and get a job
- Gov't help isn't available for people like me anyway - we're just too awesome
My business is going, but I'm at the just before dawn stage:
- Not making enough to completely support my family
- Not enough free time to take a job, even part time, without essentially trashing my own business
- Making enough progress to know that things will get to sustainable levels, but it's slow going
So I've rationalized my position and am drawing on gov't resources (food and medical) despite the fact that I could go get a "real" job and fully support my family with no assistance.
In the meantime, though, I've become the person I used to rail against -an adult perfectly capable of working for my own and my family's support who chooses to use gov't support. I have rationalized my position, as in theory won't be doing this forever, but the end result is the same. In theory I could keep my income level at a stable $30k/year, and the gov't would provide another $20k-$40k in food and medical assistance on top of that because we're considered below the poverty line, and I could do so indefinitely (there is, apparently, no expiration to food (whole family) and medical (children only) benefits, like there is for income assistance, unemployment, and many other programs).
Now, we're not doing this without significant personal sacrifice, and my children are learning the value of money much more quickly than I did as a child. Financial strain is one of the major causes of divorce in the US, and I can understand why. Some of the conversations we've had about the tiniest expenses boggles my mind.
But I would never have characterized us as being in poverty. Further, while we're only using food and medical assistance right now, the gov't food budget for a family of my size is 3 times what our food budget was when I was making $90k/year. I've talked to a social scientist about this, and they pointed out that 1) the federal program does not account for regional cost of living differences, and 2) "healthy" food is generally more expensive than "quick and cheap" food. So the gov't program is really designed to support the ideal diet in a medium to expensive part of the country, but is applied to my family in a moderate cost of living area who already budgets food frugally. Ironically, we buy more junk food now than we did before (mmmmm, pizza rolls....) because we couldn't justify them on our previous budget, but also to some degree we are "making up" our other sacrifices by splurging on food. We can't justify the cost to take the kids to an amusement park, but they love being able to pick out their own treats and lunch (we would never buy lunchables or twinkies previously, so to the kids that type of packaged food is a big treat) on the way to a park.
tldr:
At what point should someone seek gov't assistance?
At what point do you think someone is abusing gov't assistance?
I've been reluctant to start this conversation for a variety of reasons, first and foremost is that I'm not asking for anything, so don't start thinking that this is a plea for anything other than an interesting discussion about social policies and how they should be perceived/used by citizens.
However it seems tied to another big problem: People are eager to cut spending and reduce deficit, but loathe to address the staggering entitlement debt issue. It'll be interesting to see how the 2012 winners address the deficit in the wake of rising entitlement costs and dropping real wage. Certainly dont see the republicans doing anything this session, 
so I say... nope! not immoral.
rly: