The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program strives to help families in need become self-sufficient through its various programs. It limits recipients to five years of benefits over their lifetime in order to avoid the trap of permanent welfare that was seen under AFDC. The TANF program includes a work requirement, encouraging recipients to work their way off of welfare. After TANF was enacted the welfare rate decreased by half while employment rates of those who received welfare rose dramatically. There are exemptions that states can take that reduce the number of welfare recipients who are required to work. Because of these exemptions only 32% of welfare recipients were working as of 2009 (Tanner & DeHaven, 2010).
Benefits for TANF recipients have been continually shrinking over the years, with benefits losing 1/5 of their value since 1996. Recipients in California, New York, New Hampshire, Connecticut and Alaska are in the worst shape, living far below the Federal Poverty Level. In 2014, only 23 of every 100 families living below the poverty level received benefits from TANF (Floyd, 2015). When the number of unemployed recipients seeking work is high and job prospects are poor, those people may use their five year supply of benefits before they are able to find work and support themselves. This can be contradictory to the intent of TANF in its original form as the program was designed with self-sufficiency in mind. Five years may not be enough time in some areas and in some economies for the poor to find steady work and to support themselves. Floyd (2015) discusses the need to hold states accountable for employment outcomes rather than on merely work activities. She suggests that the measure of TANF’s success should be that families leave the program with jobs rather than only having participated in activities that relate to work such as job training, but are not actual jobs. Floyd feels that this is one step that can greatly improve the goal of TANF and leave fewer unemployed families under its care.
3) Pratik Patel
Mon Jun 13, 2016 at 6:33 pm
Apple is one of the biggest companies that focus on gross profit. According to Cnn money, “Good news for Apple. The company has $203 billion in cash on its balance sheet, becoming the first corporation ever to cross the $200 billion mark” (La Monica 2015). Many people say Apple has more money on hand then the United State Government. They make their products in China, which help them have a bigger bottom line. Apple use retail stores to sell their product, but they refuse to give 100% profit the retailers. Retailers gets less then 10% profit from apple products while apple makes more then 30% profit from their products. Seems like they use their September sales to boast the revenue for the next year. September is when apple launches their new product and customer is always wanted to be the first one to get it. They are powerhouse when it comes to technology and customer friendly users. Apple is making close to 40% gross profit off their sales, which is hard to do in the competitive market. Even after their operating income they are making close to 30% margin. Their net profit margin is close to 23% margin because they have good profit in their margin.
Tue Jun 14, 2016 at 3:33 pm
Starbucks is the largest coffee house chain and a leader in retail coffee and teas. According to Fortune, people are storing more money on their Starbucks cards than they are at some banks. The company now has 12 million loyalty members and they are paying for their coffee using their Starbucks card or mobile app, which now have a total of $1.2 billion loaded onto them. Starbucks is a company that continues to grow and gain loyal customers (Wieczner, 2016). Starbucks’ gross profit margin, operating income margin, and net income margin have only continued to rise in the past 3 years. Starbucks is close to making a whopping 60% gross profit off their sales. After operating income they are making close to 20% margin. Their net profit margin is at 14% because they have great gross profit margin and good operating income margin. I do not see Starbucks slowing down.