• Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Garnished” means to take an amount small enough not to diminish her means of survival. She just wouldn’t have her luxuries.

    Even in single payer systems, dumbasses should be fined for damages.

    • HotChickenFeet@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      FWIW, in the US, seems like you’re ‘guaranteed’ that you’ll keep 30 hours worth of minimum wage per week. the minimum wage is abysmal, so ~870 a month, which isn’t really enough to survive on in many places. I suspect it would be terribly difficult to pay rent, gas/electric, buy food, pay for public transport and/or gas.

      I think this person was dumb. I think they fucked up badly. I think garnishment could make sense if the terms were more reasonable. But I think the current terms could absolutely be detrimental to ones survival.

      Title III also protects individuals by limiting the amount of earnings that may be garnished in any workweek or pay period to the lesser of 25 percent of disposable earnings or the amount by which disposable earnings are greater than 30 times the Federal minimum hourly wage prescribed by Section 6(a) (1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. This limit applies regardless of how many garnishment orders an employer receives. The Federal minimum wage is $7.25 per hour. Source