I know we are all all upset about the Child Allowance Website, but I want to register a Formal Complaint to Administrative Burdens twitter about Massachusett's vaxmillionsgiveaway.com
1.) Why the heck is this opt in? Use a state database that covers 90% of the population (for example, driver's licenses), then confirm vaccination upon being drawn.
2.) You need to respond to winning with TWENTY FOUR HOURS to be eligible
At least someone will get a RDD out of it.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The reasons Democrats have "abandoned" work requirements as a guiding principle is that they do not actually perform their intended function - imposing work requirements does not increase labor force participation.'
When policies do not work, we should move on from them.
I though this was a really interesting point. A lot of the jobs (ie, servers) that are trying to hire right now are *especially* unpleasant when they are short staffed.
The only thing that makes sense to me is that people believe that there are psycho-social benefits to work, but poor people are *unaware* of them.
I don't think that makes much sense.
Some folks are pointing out that another possibility is that people are present-biased, and may not be willing to pay the sort term costs of working, even if the long-term benefits are strong.
Saying "incentives matter" doesn't have to imply anything negative about people living in poverty. In general, the idea that people are very sharp and goal-oriented (which is what I generally understand 'incentives matter' to mean) is good.
That said, I think this language is often sort of crudely appropriated and used in a misleading way.
This is particularly the case with discussions of welfare reform, where people use this kind of language to make the exact opposite claim that "incentives matter" should tell us.