Skip to comments.California EDD (Employment Development Department) Replaces Unemployment Checks With Debit Cards
Posted on 07/10/2011 10:10:27 AM PDT by Libloather
California EDD Replaces Unemployment Checks With Debit Cards
July 8, 2011 8:55 AM
SACRAMENTO (KCBS) Calling it a major change in the history of Californias unemployment program, the Employment Development Department is now sending out debit cards instead of traditional checks to people receiving unemployment benefits.
The phase-in transition from paper to plastic is expected to take a few months to complete.
Starting Friday, debit cards are replacing unemployment checks for the 1.2 million Californians currently receiving benefits.
(Excerpt) Read more at sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com ...
Mabels Cathouse is down with the debit. They say “No prob”.
Are these debit cards able to be used at Disneyland and Vegas casinos, the way the debit cards for public assistance people were used at such places????/
Gives new meaning to “paper or plastic”.
It makes no difference whether they cut checks, do auto-deposit, or give our a debit card. UI payments are CASH payments and can be spent on whatever the recipient wants to spend them on. This is not the same thing as debit cards issued as “food stamps,” welfare benefits, etc.
If California actually had some money in the bank, I suspect that these cards would be counterfeited by the Chinese.
Many states (Texas included) already have been doing this for some time. It’s the 21st Century.
Just a little screw loose aren't you? Unemployment checks are cashed for money, and this money can be used for whatever the unemployed person wishes to use it for. Ditto the cards, they will be used in place of cash or can be cashed out and used for whatever. There are no restrictions on what unemployment recipients can do with their checks, or in this case cards. We are not talking welfare here, this is unemployment.
There is a cost to the taxpayer for act of providing checks or debit cards. The state should start deducting fees from the beneficiaries to offset the cost of providing checks or debit cards.
If nothing else, this will encourage the beneficiaries to explore credit unions and sign up for direct deposit of their unemployment checks.
...as long as the state has the money, fine.
How do they manage to do this, but getting a voter ID would be impossible to implement?
Welfare, unemployment, Medicare, Medicaid, takes care of everyone but working people. However they get paychecks so the government can send Voter ID’s to the rest.
Interesting, especially in light of the recent announcement that the US Bureau of Engraving and Printing is printing even less paper money, which is very odd, as there is only enough paper money in the US to back about 5% of our daily retail needs. And the vast amount of what they print is $1 bills, with proportionally fewer higher denomination bills.
And that a large portion of our $100 bills are sent overseas. So even if they wanted to, they could not print $500 or $1000 bills, for the simple reason that nobody could make change for them.
This could turn very bad, very fast, if there are any problems at all with our electronic based money. Say, if the credit card companies could no longer sell bonds to underwrite their card holder debt.
Within a month or so, tens of millions of Americans would no longer be able to pay their rent or buy food.
Unemployed people actually pay for this benefit so that when they become unemployed they have a small cushion to fall on.
They are taxed on it as well.
You want to make their lives even harder by imposing fees on the use of their money?
Thank you! Some people don’t know the difference and there IS a difference no matter what they argue.
You are so right. After 20 years of continuous employment my husband and I found ourselves laid off from the company that we both worked for on literally the same day. We were both high performers and recently promoted, we got caught in the wave of Obama lay-offs in early 2009.
I was able to find employment fairly quickly and have been back at the same company for the last 2 years. My husband has worked short contract jobs and has struggled to even get an interview. We have relayed on his UI benefits to make ends meet while working to cut our expenses back to balance out the rest.
Our plight is the plight of thousands of families and to intimate that some how we use our direct deposited benefits irresponsibly is offensive.
massive data fraud,
ringing up items that were never bought,
big brother tracking/approving healthy sanctioned food.
I think there is probably more fraud potential with checks. forgery, stealing them from the mail, etc...
it takes time to forge a check, seconds to manipulate hacked data.
imagine just hacking or bribing a seiu employee to create a few extra accounts.
With direct data to bank, you don’t need an actual address.
Employers pay SUTA and FUTA.
If you don’t spend your entire monthy payout that month, does the surplus sit in a government controlled account and accrue interest?
I would think there is a tremendous permanence to receiving a debit card versus a check...
With unemployment at ~10%, 1 in 10 mailboxes is going to have an unemployment check in them. And do you trust postal workers? If hacking were really an issue, it would just as easy to hack the system to mail a check as to credit a debit card. How many cases of hacked debit cards have you heard of versus stolen checks?
So these poor people are at a disadvantage at election time because they are too stupid to aquire some form of picture ID but they are smart enough to apply for and use an ATM card? How do they apply with no photo ID?
Kill motor voter, require picture ID to vote.
I’m still laughing at the ‘Newspeak’ government title, ‘Employment Development Department’. HA! George Orwell anyone?
One drawback i forsee is the plastic factor. Some recipients may be less responsible to their budgets and the debit cards could make them spend their funds more quickly and perhaps more on trivial items. In other words their money runs out a lot faster before the end of the month.
I’m just laughing about the name of the place. “Employment Development Department”. Yet another thing that is created by the government, from which all good things flow </s>.
You sure about that? Pardon my sarcasm.
Besides the company he worked for still has to pay into unemployment as long as he/she is drawing it. Your tax dollars are not paying for unemployment, at least not to the extent they pay for welfare. Plus, as I said, in order to get unemployment the person had to work at least 18 months before drawing benefits. Before the extensions started being tossed around if you ran out of unemployment and reapplied you had to have 18 months of work still to draw from. I suppose that has been done away with but still unemployment is NOT welfare.
Hopefully, wise a**, you won't ever have to draw it, but don't count on that. BTW, I am not on unemployment, I am lucky enough to be retired, but I have been on unemployment in the past and was glad to get it until I could get back to work.
This is the ‘can’t buy or sell without the mark’ scenario that ultimately comes to pass.
I think that tin foil hat is getting a little tight. It seems to be cutting off the blood flow to your brain.
That is true here in California but not all states. I don’t recall which states where the employee contributes but in any case, I consider it a component of the employees overall burden just I have to consider Social Security.
Every % I am taxed on an employee affects the total burden of their employment just as insurance, gas and bunch of other crap I pay does.
It’s beyond offensive but I can’t think of a better word.
you can hack hundreds quickly and make mico theft profitable.
I use my debit card for everything and hardly ever write a check anymore.
I am shaking my head a bit. You sound like one of those busybody libs who never gives anyone credit for having a brain and treats grown adults like children.
No I don’t, what I want them to do is accept something like direct deposit which saves the taxpayers money as compared to checks or debit cards.
If they don’t want to pay checking account fees at traditional banks, they can open accounts in credit unions for free, and access it from most or all credit union ATMs for free.
Why should the taxpayers pay an administrative fee to provide this aid?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.