EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Screwed Unemployed Workers and Rising Concentrated Poverty
Unemployment insurance and poverty
Congresswoman Barbara Lee, co-chair of the Congressional Out of Poverty Caucus, voted against the recent extension of unemployment benefits because it shortened the maximum number of weeks a jobless worker could qualify.
“Instead of scaling back unemployment benefits we need to be adding weeks to help people get by when there continues to be four workers in line for each job,” said Lee.
She makes a hell of a point.
While most of the media has focused on the Democrats “pretty much getting what they wanted,” it has given short shrift to what this deal means for the long-term unemployed, currently at near-record levels, with 43 percent of unemployed people jobless for more than six months. Under the new deal they will receive fewer weeks of unemployment benefits than was available between the end of 2009 and last year, with the maximum reduced from 99 weeks to 73 weeks by September 2012.
So what are the consequences of the Democrats “win” for the long-term unemployed?
A new report from the US Government Accountability Office (GAO)—“Unemployment Insurance: Economic Circumstances of Individuals Who Exhausted Benefits”—gives some indication of what might lie ahead for these folks and others not even fortunate enough to qualify for unemployment benefits in the first place.![](/sites/commondreams.org/files/imce-images/child-poverty-rates-rise.jpg ""The Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Kids Count reports that nearly 8 million children in the US live in areas of “concentrated poverty,” defined as at least 30 percent of residents living below the federal poverty level—about $22,000 for a family of four," writes Kaufmann")
"The Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Kids Count reports that nearly 8 million children in the US live in areas of “concentrated poverty,” defined as at least 30 percent of residents living below the federal poverty level—about $22,000 for a family of four," writes Kaufmann
The GAO notes that of the 15.4 million workers who lost jobs from 2007 to 2009, half received Unemployment Insurance (UI), half didn’t, and about 2 million exhausted benefits by early 2010.
That group of 2 million had an unemployment rate of 46 percent in January 2010, and a poverty rate of 18 percent compared to 13 percent among working-age adults. More than 40 percent of those who had exhausted their benefits had incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty line (below about $35,000 for a family of three), which is the level where many economists believe people start really struggling to pay for the basics.
The good news is Mitt Romney’s strong safety net then kicks in, right? So we can anticipate that unemployed people are able to obtain a little cash welfare until that 4-to-1 (job seekers-for-every available job) ratio drops down?
Not so much.
Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), a cash welfare program designed to help families in distress, is a case in point. It doesn’t reach as many people as it used to—only twenty-seven for every 100 families in poverty, compared to 68 of every 100 prior to the 1996 welfare reform that both parties tout as a success. It’s also limited to people with children age 18 or younger, so over half of those who exhausted UI benefits didn’t qualify. Therefore it comes as little surprise that only 3 percent of households that exhausted UI benefits received TANF; 15 percent received food stamps, and18 percent were in families where someone received retirement, disability, or survivors benefits from Social Security programs.
What is also striking is who doesn’t qualify for unemployment benefits at all.
According to the report, 49 percent of the 15.4 million people who lost jobs between 2007 and 2009 received UI, and that’s only because the program expanded during the recession. From 2005 to 2007, only 36 percent of the 8.3 million people who lost jobs received benefits. Who’s being excluded?
Low-wage workers, primarily.
“Those in the bottom 30 percent in earnings were half as likely to receive UI benefits as displaced workers in the top 70 percent,” the report reads.
The GAO notes that it’s tougher for these workers to meet the minimum earnings requirement and “family crises can also cause some in marginal financial situations to quit a job (for example, to care for a sick child)” which can make them ineligible in some states due to quitting “voluntarily.”
“Nearly half of displaced workers didn’t receive unemployment benefits,” says Elizabeth Lower-Basch, senior policy analyst at the Center for Law and Social Policy. “Moreover, all the young adults transitioning into the labor market who haven’t been able to get their first jobs because of the recession aren’t counted as either displaced workers or UI recipients. So both the displaced workers who didn’t receive UI and the youth entering the workforce are likely to have even higher poverty rates than those who have exhausted their UI benefits.”
In 2010, the federal extension of unemployment benefits kept 3.2 million Americans from falling into poverty. In 2012, with this recent Congressional deal reducing the maximum number of weeks of benefits, will we see the same antipoverty effect? And what about the workers who receive no benefits at all?
Maybe it’s time to look at how the unemployment insurance system functions as a whole, and how it can reach more people.
Fair Pay for Home Care Workers
There are currently 1.8 million low-wage home care workers in an industry that earns $84 billion in annual revenues. According to the National Women’s Law Center (NWLC), more than 9 out of 10 of the workers are women, disproportionately women of color. They are currently excluded from basic federal minimum wage and overtime protections, despite the fact that their work is demanding, stressful, and so vital to millions of families. Many of these women are primary income earners for their families and the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports sub-poverty median earnings below $21,000 for full-time work ($22,314 is the poverty threshold for a family of four).
The Depart of Labor has proposed a rule change so that home care workers finally receive the minimum wage and overtime protections they deserve. The change would help women who are working to lift their families out of poverty and also reduce pay disparities between men and women. Higher wages would also reduce high turnover and therefore improve quality and constancy of care.
The DOL is accepting comments on the proposal from organizations and individuals and just extended the deadline to March 12.
“The home care industry is pushing back hard against the proposal,” says Joan Entmacher, vice president for family economic security at NWLC. “The number of comments received matters, so I would encourage anyone who supports this rule change to file a comment immediately.”
NWLC notes 16 states already require minimum wage and overtime pay for most home health workers, proving it can be done without adversely impacting jobs and care as the industry claims it would. Also, Addus HealthCare, one of the largest home care employers, pays overtime and travel time to all of its caregivers whether required by state law or not. The total national cost of the proposed rule change is estimated to be less than one-tenth of one percent of the industry’s $84 billion in annual revenues.
Don’t let industry dominate the DOL’s review. Make sure your voice is heard today.
A Devastating Kids Count
The Annie E. Casey Foundation’s Kids Count reports that nearly 8 million children in the US live in areas of “concentrated poverty,” defined as at least 30 percent of residents living below the federal poverty level—about $22,000 for a family of four.
That’s 11 percent of children in the country, and it’s 25 percent more than lived in concentrated poverty in 2000. What makes this even more alarming and is perhaps a testament to the proliferation of low-wage work and concentration of wealth—75 percent of these kids have at least one parent working in the labor force.
Laura Speer, associate director for policy reform and data at the foundation, said she finds the new data “particularly disturbing” because the long-term trends have taken such a turn for the worse. Between 1990 and 2000, concentrated poverty was reduced and things were moving in the right direction. But the decade between 2000 and 2010 tells a different story.
“Poverty is re-concentrating,” she told me. “There’s more segregation in terms of income in the US and this can have really bad impacts for kids.”
As the report notes, families living in areas of concentrated poverty are more likely to face food hardship, have trouble paying their housing costs, and lack health insurance than those living in more affluent areas. Children are “more likely to experience harmful levels of stress and severe behavioral and emotional problems than children overall.” Even children in middle- and upper-income families living in areas of concentrated poverty are 52 percent more likely to fall down the economic ladder as an adult.
“Part of what we want to reinforce is the concept that children don’t grow up in isolation,” said Speer. “They are affected by both their family’s resources and also very much impacted by the community in which they live. The community is critically important because it really does for many kids equate to the opportunities that they have access to.”
The states with the highest rates of children living in concentrated poverty are in the south and southwest, while Detroit (67 percent), Cleveland (57 percent), and Miami (49 percent) have the highest levels among the nation’s 50 largest cities.
Speer said that although the data is bleak, concentrated poverty “is not intractable.”
“There are things that can be done and a lot of innovative ideas out there that are being tried that make me hopeful,” she said.
The report points to new approaches helping people find jobs, education opportunities, and access services outside their neighborhoods, or move to neighborhoods with more opportunities.
Public/private partnerships are developing mixed-income neighborhoods in Atlanta, Baltimore, New Orleans, and San Francisco supported by federal programs like the Choice Neighborhoods Initiative. These efforts invest in early childhood and education programs for children, and workforce development and asset-building programs for parents and residents.
Since 2010, the federal Partnership for Sustainable Communities has supported coordination of employment, affordable housing and transportation in 103 metropolitan regions across the country, taking what Speer said is “a more long-term, realistic approach to the idea of development rather than just moving everything out to the suburbs.”
Finally, the report notes programs like the federal Moving to Opportunity demonstration project, and housing mobility programs for families with Section 8 vouchers, that show promise in helping low-income families move out of areas of concentrated poverty and access affordable housing in low-poverty neighborhoods.
But even if Speer is confident that we can take on concentrated poverty, she adds a word of caution.
“What’s scary to me is that we really don’t know what the impact of the recession is going to be on these communities in the long-term,” she said. “This is the initial glimpse at it. But it’s hard to even know what’s going to be the impact of the foreclosure crisis in the long-term on these communities.”
For further reading and additional resources please see the extended version of this post at The Nation.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
38 Comments so far
Show AllThis article gives us proof that the democrats only throw crumbs to keep people in line while the majority of what the democrats do is to enable the same agenda as the republicans.
Everything beneficial to this society (and the world) is reduced to bit by bit portions which are gradually reduced and reduced while the aspects of society which do enormous damage and increase limitations on people have money poured into them without restraint. This is their corporate bipartisanship clearly on display.
So, why is Barbara Lee a democrat? Is it because she is a willing participant in the deception that the democrats have different priorities than their allies who call themselves republican?
Will Barbara Lee be going to Charlotte, North Carolina to celebrate the coronation of the Corporate democrat CEO Obama who disdains her supposed beliefs?
Does she have any idea of the damage she is doing by staying inside the corporate owned party? She (and all of her so-called progressive democrat colluders) will never be believable as long a she stays a willing part of the machine.
It truly is a shame.
Re-read that please. What Lee voted against was a stab-in-the back bill which purported on one hand to extend benefits but actually reduced the number of weeks for those benefits before you get cut off. So the net is a reduction, not an extension. It was a PR hack job.
"dreamdancer"
You need to reread it.
Barbara Lee voted against the "PR hack job" which actually was voting against her own party. This was a good thing, but then she and her so-called progressive colleagues will continue to help support a corporate owned party.
My point is that she is guilty of helping the democrats pretend that they are not owned by corporations.
If she and her so-called progressive colleagues were serious about working FOR the people, they could not be part of a corporate party.
She is part of another "PR hack job" which keeps people from making real change for the better.
The democrats, republicans, and libertarians are all corporate owned parties.
They will never challenge the source of their money and they will continue to eat away, bit by bit, at the programs which are beneficial to this society.
this article is a sign of the times and a harbinger of what is to come
nwo will devastate working people into paupers while they themselves live in their multi-million dollar mansions and drive around in their limos and fly in their private jets to their 8 or 10 homes like the demon al gore
bill gates house cost 610 million dollars to build and that's why i am sure he is the guy to go to when it comes to convincing the sheeple they need to "cut back"
he wants to kill of 15% of africa - if as he says "we do a really good job"
he already supports killing granny
what a guy
just thought i would share this piece today that is in all the english papers
"Crematorium heats swimming pool
A cash-strapped council has revealed plans to heat a swimming pool using furnaces at a nearby crematorium.
Town hall chiefs want to use excess heat generated by the incinerator to warm the water for swimmers - and save £14,500-a-year on heating bills.
If approved, Redditch Borough Council will be the first authority in the country to use a crematorium to heat a swimming pool.
The council has outlined plans to heat Abbey Stadium Sports Centre from the cremators at neighbouring Borough Of Redditch Cemeteries & Crematorium."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/8279648/Crematorium-heats-swimming-pool.html
"'Green scheme' will harness energy from crematorium to heat swimming pool
Heat from a crematorium will be used to warm a leisure centre and swimming pool in Worcestershire in a controversial green scheme expected to be approved tonight.
The Abbey Stadium leisure centre in Redditch will use waste heat from neighbouring Redditch Crematorium to conserve energy and costs."
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/green-scheme-will-harness-energy-from-crematorium-to-heat-swimming-pool-2206355.html
this is in england where the whole global warming/green/sustainable scheme has been forced upon the people against their will. factories shut down and people put out of work literally by the hundreds of thousands
these people are sick fucks and their satan worship is all too obvious in stories like this
when they privatize the industry of burning people to heat pools i am sure the industry will demand a "fixed" number of bodies per day to ensure they make their money so the euthanizing doctors will probably have to off granny to make quota
in africa companies from france and england kill off indigenous peoples to clear land to grow non-indigenous trees to earn carbon credits
fuck the people folks - let's make some money
global warming became climate change and now that the climate change psyop is falling apart we see the move to "sustainability". the green movement has been lurking on its own for a number of years
that gloriously undefined state of bliss where the oligarchs do what they want and the sheeple get killed off for the betterment of all
we live in sick times...
If you were a chef, I would not be surprised if you'd mix human excrement into an otherwise good sauce. Your posts too often merge ACTUAL data into the toxic stew of YOUR climate change denialist rants!
There's this prize, as shit for the sauce:
"this is in england where the whole global warming/green/sustainable scheme has been forced upon the people against their will. factories shut down and people put out of work literally by the hundreds of thousands."
And this gem:
"global warming became climate change and now that the climate change psyop is falling apart we see the move to "sustainability". the green movement has been lurking on its own for a number of years."
The political distrust for profit-seeking elites does NOT extend to scientists and people who SEE what's going on. I suppose you think Bill Gates is responsible for the shrinking Arctic Ice cover?
How could you be so dense?
I have no patience, tolerance, or polite reflex to those who are here to obfuscate the KEY issue of our times. Your lies and dis-information on this matter are tantamount to telling everybody it'll all be Okay. To just remain seated in the lower cabins while the captain of the Titanic guides the way.
Sure, you rant at that same captain IF you can equate his interests with global financial elites, or if he happens to seek a say in public education... but on this one, you are WAY out of the ethical ballpark.
And why is it that you dominate these threads? Most people have jobs or are retired, apart from those PAID to build cred by spending their days HERE. Once they establish themselves as a "friendly brand name," they capitalize on that resource by planting industry friendly LIES.
Sick times, indeed.
Where's Wayne?
another pathetic comment from you siouxrose
the shit you talk about is all in your mind believe me and there's seems to be an endless supply of it
funny that you think i dominate these threads - that's is in your mind. its a thought that is about as real as all the tired rockefeller claptrap that permeates most of your posts
most people don't pay them any mind. the fact that you do over and over again is your fetish - i take no responsibility for the "shit" as you call it that lives in you
if you have nothing better to do than respond to facts with your crap then i suggest you get a hobby
not only that - you always embrace the nwo and their psyop to imprison the planet - why is that. you shouldn't worry so much - they are going to get you into the fema prisons soon enough girl
you don't know what you are talking about. simple as that
about the arctic ice - and btw i have worked in the arctic with first nations assessing the extent of damage done to traditional trapping lines of the indigenous people by mining exploration, i have been there sister and i have some experience with the ice cap which i very much doubt that you have
from 2008
"NASA Marshall Space Flight Center data shows 2008 ice nearly identical to 2002, 2005 and 2006. Maps of Arctic ice extent are readily available from several sources, including the University of Illinois, which keeps a daily archive for the last 30 years. A comparison of these maps (derived from NSIDC data) below shows that Arctic ice extent was 30 per cent greater on August 11, 2008 than it was on the August 12, 2007"
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/15/goddard_arctic_ice_mystery/
from 2010
"JAXA Arctic Ice measurement just had its 8th birthday. They have been measuring Arctic ice extent since late June, 2002.
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm
We normally see year over year ice graphs displayed in the format above, with each year overlaid on top of previous years. The graph below just shows the standard representation of a time series, with the linest() trend.
As you can see, Arctic ice extent has been increasing by nearly 50,000 km² per year. Over the eight year record, that is an increase in average ice extent of about the size of California"
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/02/arctic-ice-increasing-by-50000-km2-per-year/
greenland's ice sheet
"For years, climate alarmists in the media have loved showing video footage of Greenland glaciers slipping into the ocean in order to evoke feelings of global warming gloom and doom in the citizenry.
On Friday, the journal Science is publishing a seventeen year study of Greenland's ice sheet that flatly contradicts all such hysterical reports and claims.
In fact, the paper concludes that such melting is a normal summertime event, and that when looked at over a longer period of time, there has been little change in the ice sheets in this region, and even possibly a slowing in glacial movement.
Imagine that."
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/07/03/nyt-maybe-greenland-isnt-melting-after-all#ixzz1nLEipZEs
the antarctic:
""A report from The Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research says that Antarctic ice is growing, not melting away. Ice core drilling in the fast ice off Australia's Davis Station in East Antarctica by the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Co-Operative Research Centre shows that last year, the ice had a maximum thickness of 1.89m, its densest in 10 years. The average thickness of the ice at Davis since the 1950s is 1.67m. A paper to be published soon by the British Antarctic Survey in the journal Geophysical Research Letters is expected to confirm that over the past 30 years, the area of sea ice around the continent has expanded.""
http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/04/18/2059204/antarctic-ice-is-growing-not-melting-away-at-davis-station
the glaciers
"The report by Vijay Kumar Raina, formerly of the Geological Survey of India, seeks to correct widely spread reports that India's 10,000 or so Himalayan glaciers are shrinking rapidly in response to climate change. It's not true, Raina says. The rumors may have originated in the Asia chapter of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC's) 2007 Working Group II report, which claims that Himalayan glaciers “are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate.” Evidently, the bogus reporting was based on measurements from only a handful of glaciers."
http://www.theresilientearth.com/?q=content/himalayan-glaciers-not-melting
"The team used data from the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment satellite, which was launched as a joint project between NASA and Germany in 2002. The GRACE satellite measures gravity, which is related to mass, in 20 distinct regions worldwide. Wahr says that gives the team more accurate estimates, because previous teams had to measure ice loss at "a few easily accessible glaciers" and then extrapolate it to the 200,000 glaciers worldwide.
"It's tough to get an estimate [with previous methods]," he says.
With GRACE, the team can measure wide swaths of the earth, giving them a more complete picture"
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/02/08/earths-polar-ice-melting-less-than-thought
keep on with your rockefeller education
all i can tell you is that my nishnawbe brothers and sister who live in the north are sick of liberals like you
you aint nishnawbe whatever else you may be
if you know more than nasa and science journal maybe you should give them a call and share
Your comment appears to be pretty much a fabrication of what YOU choose to believe. Anyone doing a quick check at the NASA website can find out the following: "Greenland, Antarctica and Peripheral Glaciers and Ice Caps - Average yearly change in mass, in centimeters of water, during 2003-2010, as measured by NASA’s Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellites, for just Greenland and Antarctica and their peripheral glaciers and ice caps (my note - they have a chart at website). There are ENORMOUS ice loss rates over substantial regions of those two ice sheets."
Regarding the U.S. News article, John Wahr said there is "about 30 percent less ice is melting than previously thought." But, as stated in the article, "Nearly 230 billion tons of ice is melting into the ocean from glaciers, ice caps, and mountaintops annually. snip... If the amount of ice lost between 2003 and 2010 covered the United States, the whole country would be under one-and-a-half feet of water, or it'd fill Lake Erie eight times, researchers say. Ocean levels worldwide are rising about six hundredths of an inch per year, according to researcher John Wahr."
So, you have lost all credibility medmedude. Now we should return to the very serious discussion about the unemployed and poverty in this country.
In North Carolina in the swamps we can hear frogs and summer birds where there is usually ice or snow. Yep! February - 70 degrees. Nothin' wrong there.
Ever see the movie "Soylent Green"? They were recycling human bodies into food.
I think it's important to remember that a majority of politicians in this country now are millionaires. So, other than those isolated incidents where they actually get out and talk to citizens (something beyond shaking hands or giving a speech then leaving), they have little exposure to the "real" world.
Average net worth of a member of Congress is about one million dollars. No, they don't earn that much, but once you get elected, you can get enough "bribes" to make yourself rich. Same is true to a lesser extent with state governments.
As a 61-year-old long-term unemployed worker facing benefits, I can attest that the recent "deal" that the Duopoly cooked up (to buy time and votes) is a bad deal.
Also, because I find myself unemployable (not only unemployed), probably because of a combination of age discrimination and a lack of jobs, I will be forced to take Social Security earlier (with lower benefits) at less than the cost of living -- below the poverty line in fact.
So the extension of the Social Security payroll tax really hits home too. As numerous articles on the site have documented, the tax cut will weaken the system, especially long term. I worry for my daughter, a hard-working skilled technician who works for low wages. I worry for her generation and those to follow.
So this double-whammy is a big hit.
And like 50 million others in the US, I can no longer afford medical insurance and will not be eligible for Medicare for 5 years.
I'm not crying here. I've had a relatively comfortable life and my health is really good. Materially, I've been really lucky. I'm just describing some facts that could be way different if we had alternatives to the Duopoly.
Medicare for All
Federal work programs ala the WPA, CCC, etc. that pay a living wage
A minimum wage that is a livable wage
Fair Taxes
End the Imperial military
Etc., Etc., Etc.
This is not brain surgery here. Maybe that's what pisses me off more than anything else and why liberals make me sick. Oh it's so hard. Oh it's so complicated.
Bull!
Support the Occupy Solidarity demos Tuesday, April 28!
And tj, adding insult to injury, if Congress gets their way, those on unemployment will soon be subjected to drug testing. That's the future of the US: you must submit to a drug test (and credit checks, and not be unemployed) to qualify for any job, and you must submit to a drug test to receive any "assistance."
Why not?? those of us on Workers Comp (Cronic Pain) are subject to monthly drug testing!
It's all I've come to expect from this government and Obummer (The Best Republican) President we ever had..
So vote for Obomber, So vote for one of the sicko Rethugs. all you do is tie the rope around your own neck!! Protest by all means, vote 3rd party, or stay home and hold your breath.. cause anyway you cut it unless your securely in the 1% you certinaly screwed! so Have a Nice Day >^^<
The US government has been planning for permanent high unemployment for years, under the leadership of both parties. These plans are being instituted now. If you can't afford health insurance for your children, then you are a child abuser and your children will be put in a government program where they will be properly (brainwashed) cared for. This like all government programs will be expensive, and the parents will be forced to pay. Being unemployed they of course can't pay, so they will be put into a forced labor FEMA camp and will pay the debt with their slave wages. They will be billed for their own room and board along with that of the children, so they will never clear the debt and will become permanent wards of the state. Corporations will be able to tap into this labor pool at rates they cannot match even in China. There will be no unemployed or homeless because it will be illegal,( self employment will be illegal to). There is no problem that cannot be solved by the coming Corporate Fascist State.
Slight correction. This is not a plan, but an on-going fact. High unemployment, the police state, and massive imprisonment have been facts of life in U.S. urban areas and rural communities for decades.
The subjects of these horrors have largely been people of color and ethnic minorities until recently.
We're all Bozos on this bus they call Amerika.
YEP! American working conditions used to be just like China. We were suffering with oppressive work places but fought and died, and everyone knows what a bloody battle that was for unions and workers rights. We got rid of child labor, we fought and died for the right to bargain, for work safety, for a 40 hour week and minimum wage. Everything white collar people enjoy today. This is how we built the middle class we went on strike and picketed - people died for it. It was painful. SO YES WE SUFFERER _________________________________________________________
American workers don't appreciate cheap/crack labor busting everything back to square 1 and suppressing wages and minimum wage which is now below poverty. It's just fine enough for someone who is willing to work for below minimum wage.
__________________________________________________________
Its simple SUPPLY and DEMAND. There are more people than jobs and an uncontrollable flood of workers willing to work for close to nothing and living 4 workers in one room. If we want our jobs back, we have to live 4 men to a room give up bargaining, give up unions, give up our standard of living, give up our homes, move away from our families to compete. Now we are living at the south of the border standard of living. And that's what happens when you allow another country to control your immigration policy.
_______________________________________________
We could really use 12,000,000 jobs.
Dear friends: This article is 100% correct. We don't need to be Karl Marx, Einstein and Noam Chomsky to judge, to be aware of the increased poverty rates in America. The USA is turning into a fourth world nation. We don't need statistics, to be aware of the rise in hunger and poverty in America. Just go out for yourself and with your senses and eyes, you can see the rise in poverty. By observing the physiological collapse of most americans, the rise in sadness, depression and all that. The rise in homeless beggars in the streets. The inability of US workers to change their cars, etc.
USA is becoming a hell of poverty and hunger. If US voters continue on their suicidal path of voting into The White House blue dog corporate Democrats and Zionist neocon Republicans, we might see in the future a real armed revolution like in Greece, Tunisia and Venezuela in 1992 and 1998. When the venezuelans got fed up with capitalism and voted into the venezuelan government a socialist.
Something has to give !! May the Lord wake up americans and help americans to hate capitalism and to welcome socialism as the only real solution for hunger and poverty
.
One thing we've got here in America is lots of guns.
And let's not forget to put in a bad word for the mandatory drug-testing provisions incorporated into the extended benefits legislation*.
Nothing like adding insult to injury by tossing a life preserver that doubles as a noose.
_________________
*See: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/21/EDN11NAHO0.DTL
Screwed Unemployed Workers and Rising Concentrated Poverty
What a travesty!
This would never happen if Barack Obama were president and the Democrats enjoyed huge majorities in the House and Senate. No Siree!
Obama and the Democrats would restore "welfare as we know it" -- or knew it before Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich teamed up to give Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) the Grover Norquist treatment and drowned the program in a bathtub in 1996.
Clinton and Gingrich, those two White, Southern, pudgy, mid-life, gray-haired, pious, virtuous, "reformers" championed "workfare" over welfare, which they were convinced created an immoral culture of generational dependency by poor women and their needy children on the government -- god forbid!
If Obama were president and the Democrats were in control of the House and Senate, they would repeal the Bush tax cuts for the rich during Obama's First 100 Days and use that money to restore AFDC, which represented only1% of the national budget when it was dismantled by the world’s two most unctuous, smarmy, grandstanding, and self-serving adulterers.
Obama and the Democrats would never allow impoverished and low-income women to suffer the ravages of long-term unemployment and thus permit those women and their beleaguered children to descend into dire poverty and food insecurity (hunger) and homelessness. No way!
Alas, Barbara Lee (D-CA) serves as the female counterpart to Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) -- once they know that a rotten piece of legislation has the sufficient number of Democratic votes to pass the House and Senate, they then vote "No" and "Nay" respectively so they can continue to keep up the charade that they are bold, principled, "progressive" mavericks.
But when Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid needed Barbara Lee and Bernie Sanders to vote for Obamacare -- because their votes were absolutely essential to passage -- those two brave mavericks lined up like lemmings and voted “Yes” and “Yea” respectively.
Yes, indeedy! Those daring mavericks refused to let the perfect be the enemy of the good...and Obamacare was better than nothing and it was historic, too – at least, that’s the way Obama framed the urgency of their affirmative votes. His presidency was at stake!
So much for “progressive” principles.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Exactly. Thank You.
Amen.
Yes the article makes good points.
But I am constantly looking for somebody to include a huge group of people who lost their income, their homes, their businesses, their lives in the economic collapse and are not eligible for any help: the self employed.
Invisible millions. Not in the numbers; not in the discussion.
Corporatists never have liked us: we don't sit in their cubicles and generate income for the .01%.
They are happy to grind the truly small businesses with their heels and not even mention the smudge on the sidewalk. We have tasted too much freedom; we cannot turn back; we are rarely hired.
Thirty years self employed which is how I managed to be a single mom of three kids now adults. No unemployment benefits. No healthcare. Cannot even eat every day in USA anymore.
This is not what I expected.
Right on. Much the same here, differing in details, of course. I come from mom-and-pop type business, and family farm and am self-employed. Never easy. Always working, even now at 3:16 in the morning as I wait for a render to finish on another machine and check Common Dreams for a bit.
Unlike large corporations which look only for percentages above a number, when you are self employed, as in a family business, you hold in there and keep on, where a corporation would see it as a line item not making a large-enough profit and dump it. This is a major difference between a work as part of your daily life versus as a commodity.
There is no good reason we don't have government health care in terms of medicine. It is needed for the same reasons that we do have government health care in terms of clean water supplies and sewers and sewage treatment, both of which contribute more to quality and length of life and freedom from disease than all medical advancements (not say those are not appreciated, just restoring perspective and restoring a the "health care" category to something we don't normally count when talking about health care).
The government has to be run for the community residing within geographic boundaries as a mechanism for mutual help and health, not an agent of exploitation by invaders who would tear up our lands and expropriate our possessions and our money, leaving us to rot, sicken and, they hope, just die.
Hi rumigirl - I do not have any personal experience with this group, so do not know the quality, but there is an organization for the self-employed.
http://www.freelancersunion.org/
Europe has realized that they almost committed suicide in two World Wars
and decided to stop doing such a dumb thing. The U,S. still seems to need a good thumpting to stop being one of the most willing nations to consider
war as an instrument of foreign policy. I would like to see us become a second or third class country so people stop asking, when there is a problem, "Why doesn't the U.S. do something?"
WHAT A HELL USA IS TURNING OUT TO BE, I JUST HEARD IN THE NEWS THAT THE POST OFFICE IS BROKE. You know how people in America for many many many yeard made fun of USSR, and how wonderful the USA has been. Well there might a truth in their statements because the USSR didn't have much luxury like America, but at least I think they had free health care and free education. Free health literally means (being safe from early death). And no health care (The current USA system), means that millions of americans are very close to dying, to death, to live in the cemetery.
So by far, a system that garantees being safe from dying early, beats a system with luxuries SUVs, lots of pizzas, lots of burgers, lots of computer games, but a system that denies a cure for millions of americans that need it, but are unable to get it in the wonderful USA.
If americans don't wake up, I will see many people in America dying at 40, and 50 years old either from suicidal depression, diabetes, cancer and other diseases in this country where only Jennifer Lopez, Tom Cruise and the rich are safe from dying.
.
The average American would be better off if they were a Canadian, lived in any of the northern European countries, lived "down under", or was a Japanese. Then you'd have a government that cared about you, a government where your taxes actually came back as benefits to you. You'd have a longer life span, a more secure retirement, national health insurance, and in many cases, a better paying job. People need to start asking, "What does America do for me that I couldn't get elsewhere living in the developed world?" Unless you are a gun owner, the answer is "nothing".
"During the last four fiscal years, the Postal Service, with the recession that we have been through, the worst recession in 80 year, and the Internet diversion, still showed an operational profit of almost $700 million during that period of time. The $20 billion-plus dollars that you read about in losses is nothing more than a congressional mandate that requires the Postal Service, required the Postal Service to take all of their cash and put it into a pre-funding account.
The Postal Service actually has somewhere between $50 billion and $125 billion in their other funds that is not taxpayer money. They haven't used a dime of taxpayer money in over 30 years."
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/government_programs/july-dec11/postoffices_09-06.html
I woiuld like to input here a comment I wanted to put on a previous article on common dreams( cancer in occupy , comments now closed ) and that I meant also as calrification to many assertations :
- the anarchy foramtions that attack peaceful change activists are mostly police stuff
- what is called as arab spring has in one way the purpose of cancealing environment degradation issues , and also to perturbate the responsibility logs , and the same applies to other major issues.
- the new era institutions in both sides ( the now ruling , and the now opponents) are just reward for silence to past political landscape elements . this applies both to old politicians of 90 years of age and some chosen poor guys ; and in all transition process ( since elections : set them candidates to be given so-called electoral subsidiaries...)
- any possible critic ( from popular activist , to independant blogger , to just innocent thinker ) is labelled " remains of RCD " that is " remains of previous regime " and let alone to misery or tortured ( as permits possible obeserver vigilance )
- the anti-republican experience started since 1987 in tunisia when all parties let alone the constitution and set a " national charter " around the persona of the then-new president-savior-from integrism (... that, we know now, started from then to prepare integrists to succeed him )
- there is agreat deal in this of systemic partisan sectarism that amounts to almost felony in social terms that led us to epidemy outbreaks due to precarity of health,nutrition and disaster response levels
- the critics of integrism and the critics now of ' government that lets alone flood victims to deal with supporting syria ' are in same time cancealing a big deal of unjustice and preventing at least one volunteer! from helping his country , due to old yrars criticism or non affiliation !
Next time, try spell checker
Memo to Employees: You may have noticed some of your fellow workers are missing today. They are no longer employed here. While it is true that some of them were outspoken proponents of unionization, and some complained about the supposed under-reporting of hours worked, or were vocal in their opposition to the ongoing rebalancing of benefits, these factors had nothing to do with their terminations. We simply had to eliminate positions due to the economy.
We wish them well in their struggle to find jobs to feed their families.We know how difficult it is to find employment today and are doing everything possible to avoid further cuts. If there is a substantial increase in employee productivity we may be able to delay another immediate reduction in headcount.
We need to pull together in these trying times and hope all of you will still be with us in the future.
In my state, we have a problem with people who are doing so well on unemployment and the benefits my state provides (healthcare, food stamps, etc) that we are having trouble hiring ANYONE - and I pay more than competitive wages, and then some. I've talked to other people from other parts of the state who asked if I'd had this similar problem - it's getting bad here, apparently all over the state.
I've never been a great proponent of 'unemployment insurance' or any other kind of extortion... excuse me, insurance - but this is ridiculous. Just about every job I see is now being filled by college students, the retired elderly, and former welfare recipients who are 'forced' to apply for jobs they really don't want. (I'd much prefer paying them welfare.) These people take employment forms with them when they 'apply' - and I never see them again (one even told me she was afraid of losing her benefits). The workers I now have tell me I am a very generous employer, compared to what they've had in the past - but I've only found one elderly lady to hire in the last 2 years (other than part-time college students) - and I'm not the only one. Some of the people I hired last year only worked a couple weeks and disappeared - work was cutting into their free time, apparently. (Some of them are getting many hundreds of dollars of food stamps, plus the food pantries, rent/mortgage assistance, and energy assistance - from church charities, which now siphon off funds that once went to government agencies.) This is outrageous! I'm all for helping those in need - I saw nothing wrong with 'welfare as we knew it' because most people were only on it for a few months. (I'm a traditional conservative.) Meanwhile, small businesses are taking it in the teeth - corporations and the declining economy have decimated 'Mom & Pop' operations, and now no workers?
I'm sure there are states where people are impoverished and can't find jobs - I know that many college grads take up to a year to get even an 'entry-level position' at 1980 wages - but these long-term unemployed receiving extended benefits has to stop some time. So long as they 'get by' - they're doing nothing to change the social and/or political atmosphere that will lead to a revived economy (and honest responsive government). It's too easy to sit home, watch TV, eat pizza and drink beer - and let someone else foot their bills and do the fighting for them.
Good people fought and even died to establish decent working conditions (and unions) in this country, and these people are throwing it all away - they're 'above' politics, you know, and can't bother with social issues other than their own personal whining. Get them off unemployment - or give everyone the same break (including small business, especially sole proprietorship).
Don't get me wrong - I hate unions - but my father always said the only thing worse than a union is a 'right to work' state (the poverty rates are always higher). If it's not 'good for society' - then it's not good for the rest of us either. There has to be a better way. Besides, way too many people - the ones who need it most - don't 'qualify' for 'unemployment insurance' benefits. (Many simply don't have transportation.) And it seems that those who need it most don't get much assistance either - guess they don't know how to 'work' the system... like those who think they're entitled to free lunches.
Just to expand upon everything you said which is true -
Minimum Wage;
Even if you spend only $12. a day for 2 people on food that's $84 a week $7.25 / hr X 40 is $290. Take out taxes that's $250 minus food leaves you $166. You now have $660 left to pay for utilities, transportation and rent.
I am a fully certified teacher. I worked as a bookkeeper (average pay) for a concrete forming company that went out of business. I applied for a substitute job. They only called me once in 6 months because they already had 300 substitutes. The unemployment office called my and told me there was a teaching job 2 counties over. It was pre school and they were paying $7.50 an hour. It was 1 1/2 hour drive. They told me if I didn't take the job, my unemployment would be denied. If I took the job I wouldn't even be able to pay for the gas. I took early retirement. I can't live on that either. I'm 68 and will work till the day I die, if I can find a second job which there aren't any where I live.
Income - $11,000,000 a year - about $5,000 an hour, give or take $500 or $600.
Income - $31,000,000 that's $15,000 an hr, give or take 1,000 and hour
You got guys like the Koch brothers who make $60,000 - $100,000 an hour spending a couple a days wages
Keeping workers in Wisconsin from making from $10 - $20 an hour
Unions got rid of child labor, gave us the 40 hour week, safe working conditions and medical care for on the job emergencies, minimum wage, time and 1/2 for overtime - all these are things that white collar people take advantage of while spitting on unions. Unions created the middle class. With cheap border labor, all these benefits won over the last 70 years are slipping away. 18 states have raised the minimum wage to $9.50 or above because $7.25 is below poverty and the states have to pick up the difference with subsidies for them anyway.
We sure could use 12 million extra jobs. And you know right where we can get those.