Poverty to Prosperity......

Published

Thirty-seven million Americans live below the official poverty line. Millions more struggle each month to pay for basic necessities, or run out of savings when they lose their jobs or face health emergencies. Poverty imposes enormous costs on society. The lost potential of children raised in poor households, the lower productivity and earnings of poor adults, the poor health, increased crime, and broken neighborhoods all hurt our nation. Persistent childhood poverty is estimated to cost our nation $500 billion each year, or about four percent of the nation's gross domestic product. In a world of increasing global competition, we cannot afford to squander these human resources.

...

1. Raise and index the minimum wage to half the average hourly wage. At $5.15, the federal minimum wage is at its lowest level in real terms since 1956. The federal minimum wage was once 50 percent of the average wage but is now 30 percent of that wage. Congress should restore the minimum wage to 50 percent of the average wage, about $8.40 an hour in 2006. Doing so would help nearly 5 million poor workers and nearly 10 million other low-income workers.

2. Expand the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit. As an earnings supplement for low-income working families, the EITC raises incomes and helps families build assets. The Child Tax Credit provides a tax credit of up to $1,000 per child, but provides no help to the poorest families. We recommend tripling the EITC for childless workers and expanding help to larger working families. We recommend making the Child Tax Credit available to all low- and moderate-income families. Doing so would move as many as 5 million people out of poverty.

3. Promote unionization by enacting the Employee Free Choice Act. The Employee Free Choice Act would require employers to recognize a union after a majority of workers signs cards authorizing union representation and establish stronger penalties for violation of employee rights. The increased union representation made possible by the Act would lead to better jobs and less poverty for American workers.

4. Guarantee child care assistance to low-income families and promote early education for all. We propose that the federal and state governments guarantee child care help to families with incomes below about $40,000 a year, with expanded tax help to higher-earning families. At the same time, states should be encouraged to improve the quality of early education and broaden access for all children. Our child care expansion would raise employment among low-income parents and help nearly 3 million parents and children escape poverty.

5. Create 2 million new "opportunity" housing vouchers, and promote equitable development in and around central cities.

6. Connect disadvantaged and disconnected youth with school and work.

7. Simplify and expand Pell Grants and make higher education accessible to residents of each state.

8. Help former prisoners find stable employment and reintegrate into their communities.

9. Ensure equity for low-wage workers in the Unemployment Insurance system.

10. Modernize means-tested benefits programs to develop a coordinated system that helps workers and families. A well-functioning safety net should help people get into or return to work and ensure a decent level of living for those who cannot work or are temporarily between jobs. Our current system fails to do so. We recommend that governments at all levels simplify and improve benefits access for working families and improve services to individuals with disabilities. The Food Stamp Program should be strengthened to improve benefits, eligibility, and access. And the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program should be reformed to shift its focus from cutting caseloads to helping needy families find sustainable employment.

11. Reduce the high costs of being poor and increase access to financial services.

12. Expand and simplify the Saver's Credit to encourage saving for education, homeownership, and retirement.

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/04/poverty_report.html

Up Vote Up Vote ×

Right on.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in ALS, LTC, Home Health.

It will never happen. To easy of a solution.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

of course we have plenty of money for tax breaks:

the size of the subsidies norquist wants for his fund manager friends is truly astounding. the special tax break for a fund manager earning $1 billion is worth $200 million, enough to provide health care insurance for more than 60,000 kids.

what is really so special about the fund manager tax break is it exposes the right-wing for what it is, not a principled movement for small government, but rather a cabal that aims to use the power of government to shift as much wealth and income as possible to those at the top. grover norquist has been quoted as saying he wants to shrink government down to the size where he can drown it in a bathtub. when it comes to those portions of the government that function to redistribute income from the poor and middle class to those at the top, this sounds like a very good idea.

http://www.cepr.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1247&itemid=45

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Infection Preventionist/ Occ Health.

I would like to see data from a respected economist to back up these claims.

This plan would be impossible to implement without steep tax increases, which would negatively impact economic progress. Also, there is no data to suggest that increasing the minimum wage and unionizing industries would do anything more than push more American jobs overseas.

I am all for doing more to help the poor in their time of need, but increased government handouts will not solve the problem. There is a saying that goes "If you give a man a fish, you feed him today. If you teach him how to fish, you feed him for a lifetime." The French economy is currently in shambles because their government basically functions as a welfare state.

IMO tax money would be better spent on infastructure, education and economic incentives for small business owners.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Public Health, DEI.

I think another thing that needs to happen (but never will) is that the Federal Poverty Level needs to be raised. I believe that for a family of 4 in the contiguous US, the level is at about $20,500. That means that a family who earns over this meager amount can't access any of the services that require FPL status. Of course, no politician is ever going to agree to raise this rate to anything more realistic because no one wants to be known for the sharp increase in poverty that supposedly occurred on their watch.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

I would like to see strong emphasis on birth control and have free sterilizations available to people who desire it. I do not feel it is my responsibility to take care of the children born to people who cannot afford to care for them. People MUST be strongly encouraged to NOT have children they cannot afford or care for. I just don't hear ANYONE in government coming out and saying this. I planned and had two children because that is what I knew I could care for and afford college and graduate school for. I could have had more but that would not have been the responsible thing to do. When I see women with no education and 5 children complain about how hhhhaaaaarrrrrrddd it is to pay for everything I don't have much sympathy. Closing their legs, using birth control and trying to get more education will go a TREMENDOUS way in getting people out of poverty. Many children combined with poor education will almost guarantee you a lifetime of poverty and doing without. Children take a tremendous amount of resources to raise to adulthood. :madface:

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Public Health, DEI.
I would like to see strong emphasis on birth control and have free sterilizations available to people who desire it. I do not feel it is my responsibility to take care of the children born to people who cannot afford to care for them. People MUST be strongly encouraged to NOT have children they cannot afford or care for. I just don't hear ANYONE in government coming out and saying this. I planned and had two children because that is what I knew I could care for and afford college and graduate school for. I could have had more but that would not have been the responsible thing to do. When I see women with no education and 5 children complain about how hhhhaaaaarrrrrrddd it is to pay for everything I don't have much sympathy. Closing their legs, using birth control and trying to get more education will go a TREMENDOUS way in getting people out of poverty. Many children combined with poor education will almost guarantee you a lifetime of poverty and doing without. Children take a tremendous amount of resources to raise to adulthood. :madface:

Actually, I couldn't disagree with you more about whether it is "our" responsibility to take care of children whose parents can't do it. I use quotations for the words ours, because I don't mean just yours and mine, but society's in general. IMHO, we owe more to these children than we do to the children whose parents work hard to take care of them. It isn't fair to parents like you and me, but it is fair to the children who would fall through the cracks otherwise, and it's the mark of a civilized society.

That being said... I also made the choice to limit the number of children I had (I only have 1) based on the financial and emotional resources I felt would be needed to provide a happy and secure life for him. He has autism, and if not for my determination to tap any and all services I thought might help- not just those that the government provides- I'd have had another, but 2 would've been my limit. I grew up poor. I don't boo-hoo about my miserable childhood because I do have some good memories and I know my parents did the very best they could do, but the bottom line is that poverty stinks. My parents didn't believe in public assistance, even the SSI income that my sister could have qualified for based on the neurological damage sustained from encephalitis. In reality, though, we got lots of resources from the government in the way of public school attendance and grants to go to college. My siblings and I are now all contributing members of society.

The other thing the government could do to cut down on the reliance on public assistance is to insist that non-custodial parents support their children. In this day and age, there are plenty of resources that could be utilized to increase the collection of child support than is currently accessed. Why do we (again, meaning we as a society) so often excuse dead beat parents from taking responsibility for the lives they've created? Enforcing child support is a far more palatable solution to childhood poverty than cutting off assistance to children who need the help.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

It is the very fact that society does take care of what parents can't or won't that encourages parents to not limit the number of children they have. Why should they,

they can breed like crazy and the taxpayers will take care of things for them. There MUST be an incentive created for people to not reproduce.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in ALS, LTC, Home Health.
The other thing the government could do to cut down on the reliance on public assistance is to insist that non-custodial parents support their children. In this day and age, there are plenty of resources that could be utilized to increase the collection of child support than is currently accessed. Why do we (again, meaning we as a society) so often excuse dead beat parents from taking responsibility for the lives they've created? Enforcing child support is a far more palatable solution to childhood poverty than cutting off assistance to children who need the help.

I agree with this statement. And this is coming from a dad that does pay his support. I have been homeless and am about to become homeless again due to paying support. But I will not ever not pay my support. Just to give a bit of info my take home after taxes and my support payment is $83 a week. I have been told by numerous ppl to have it lowered. I have tried and DRO will not lower it as in my state and county (PA) it is not based on my income but on my earning potential. This applies to everyone in my county as well. I feel this is wrong but supporting my children is part of being a parent and I do not take that obligation lightly. I also want to say thank you for not saying deadbeat dad. There are many mothers who skip out on their support obligations as well as fathers.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
I would like to see data from a respected economist to back up these claims.

This plan would be impossible to implement without steep tax increases, which would negatively impact economic progress. Also, there is no data to suggest that increasing the minimum wage and unionizing industries would do anything more than push more American jobs overseas.

I am all for doing more to help the poor in their time of need, but increased government handouts will not solve the problem. There is a saying that goes "If you give a man a fish, you feed him today. If you teach him how to fish, you feed him for a lifetime." The French economy is currently in shambles because their government basically functions as a welfare state.

IMO tax money would be better spent on infastructure, education and economic incentives for small business owners.

Dean Baker is a PhD economist. But I encourage you to follow the links to the articles I excerpted to read the analysis and commentary in its entirety. The CAP data is also based on current economic data and trends.

I am fully in agreement with you about increased investment in education and people as a way to address the very real economic problems of this country. (I specifically reference the following from my original post "And the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program should be reformed to shift its focus from cutting caseloads to helping needy families find sustainable employment." (emphasis added). Sustainable employment means holding a job that requires more skill than tending a cash register at your local big box retailer. I don't know of a single progressive who argues that anyone should sit home. Rather the emphasis is on reducing barriers to achievement, encouraging real job skills and earning a living wage as a result. This is an approach that is consistent with values of fairness, hard work and achievement.

Increased tax breaks for the ultra wealthy will not solve our problems or result in any real net economic growth. Increasing the minimum wage will not shove jobs overseas. (There was actually a study referenced by The Nation done in MD that showed the converse effect of a Minimum wage increase in other words the state with the higher minimum wage had a better overall economy.)

growth%20in%20income%20since%2079-tm.jpg

http://ezraklein.typepad.com/blog/charts/index.html

The above shows the income trends since 1979.

This idea of broadly shared prosperity as being an engine for success has been demonstrated elsewhere:

international%20mobility-tm.jpg

We have lower economic mobility than the social democracies of Europe.

http://ezraklein.typepad.com/blog/charts/index.html

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Med-Surg.
4. Guarantee child care assistance to low-income families and promote early education for all. We propose that the federal and state governments guarantee child care help to families with incomes below about $40,000 a year, with expanded tax help to higher-earning families. At the same time, states should be encouraged to improve the quality of early education and broaden access for all children. Our child care expansion would raise employment among low-income parents and help nearly 3 million parents and children escape poverty.

This is the main one for me. So many single parents can't afford to go to work because of the cost of child care. I got 1 year of child care assistance 15 years ago and it changed my, and my children's, life. One year might not be enough for a lot of people, but it allowed me to get into a job which allowed me to get a better one. Noone could have done anything better for my family than to give me that chance to go to work. I've never lived too high on the hog, but I own my own home and I'm a tax paying citizen. I'd love nothing more than for my taxes to help other single parents go to work instead of being spent to bomb people to death.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion