News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Suspicious discontinuities (2020). Parent comment

Re:Suspicious discontinuities (2020) by AceJohnny2 on Wednesday March 20, 2024 @01:33PM (#39769688)
> I have never understood why things like this don't use some sort of sliding scale, rather than absolute dividing line.

Because it's easier to pass a law that sets up such welfare when it has a simple threshold, or at least it was.

Last time this article came up, someone referenced a group of lawmakers in the US who were working at smoothing out these awful discontinuities, but I can't quickly rustle up the link.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Suspicious discontinuities (2020) by bombcar on Wednesday March 20, 2024 @01:54PM (#39769956)
And there are tons of these various programs, all with differing requirements, and some take into account others and some don't.

Some trigger "automatically" (if you apply for X and receive it, you qualify for Y, Z) and that can have weird side effects, too.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Suspicious discontinuities (2020) by cranky908canuck on Wednesday March 20, 2024 @10:32PM (#39774362)
The cliff might be a political feature: you save paying out the benefit (that you took credit for funding) since people who blow the cliff lose the money, but if they complain can be characterized as (some variation of) "welfare cheats".
[ Parent | on HN ]