Question

Suppose state legislators are debating the way the state links the receipt of welfare benefits to attending job-training sessions. Suppose also that a recent study finds job training has little to no effect on the earning prospects of the state’s welfare recipients. For this reason, one politician argues that the job-training requirement should be eliminated. Others aren't so sure. What do you think? (Hint: consider this proposal in the context of the costs, benefits, and targeting.)

Answer 1

We do not agree with the politician. The reason is only one study can not be conclusive. We need many studies and concrete data to reach any conclusion. Theoretically there is sound reason to believe that job training can increase earning potential of welfare recipients. This will ultimately reduce costs to govt as govt has to provide for less beneficiaries.Only genuine people will get unemployment benefits and it will led to precise targeting of welfare benefits.