[crystalmeph]

Yeah, making people work for free at for-profit businesses is not a valid precondition for welfare. I didn't see that in this article though.

There has to be a social safety net, but I think it's a valid goal to encourage welfare recipients to work if they are able. One thing we should definitely do is reform the "vertical cliff" of payments, where once you make above a certain threshold, you stop receiving all benefits. That's a definite disincentive to get a better job past a certain point.

[pjc50]

The article talks about work requirements, but does not specify a minimum wage or minimum effective wage. Is someone who is signed up for one of these task apps but only given one hour work a week "working"?

Not to mention that the flood of workers forced into this position will necessarily bid down the hourly rates.

[yummyfajitas]

Of course it will bid down hourly rates. That will increase demand for such services, thereby allowing more people to enter the workforce [1]. Unemployed workers get jobs, consumers get more services - a win for everyone!

[1] It's interesting how the gig economy can reduce sticky wages, making inflationary stimulus unnecessary.