News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Fired by mod on Friday March 06, 2015 @03:56PM (#9159529)
I don't think the "social safety net" was intended to keep wealthy people wealthy.

It's to ensure basic needs are met.

If you want to remain wealthy, you should probably not count on unemployment to play a role in that.

Re:Fired by showsover on Friday March 06, 2015 @04:13PM (#9159599)
And in Belgium, you are wrong about that. If you take home 1500€ net each month, and lose your job, social security first gives you around the same 1450 - 1500. After a few months (I think 3 or so) it goes down to 1300 or so, until you get a maximum of X where X is around the minimum living wage.

This is to ensure that people don't have to sell or move immediately after being fired. Which makes sense.

Re:Fired by markcampbell on Friday March 06, 2015 @07:32PM (#9160431)
This example is flawed. What is the max take home pay of someone on unemployment benefits in Belgium? In Canada under EI (employment insurance) it's about $500 per week (~$2000 CAD per month).
Re:Fired by angersock on Friday March 06, 2015 @04:09PM (#9159585)
I think your definition of wealthy needs some serious, serious readjustment.
Re:Fired by Yakimoto on Saturday March 07, 2015 @04:54PM (#9163258)
Maybe you should consider adjusting your understanding of poor too.