Sunday, February 14, 2016
Social welfare spending hasn't reduced poverty much? No surprise.
Social welfare spending hasn't reduced poverty much? No surprise. Example: EITC, $60 billion -- sound like a lot? Equals 1/3 of one percent of GDP in an economy where 45% of the workers are earning less than what the minimum wage could very practicably be: $15 an hour.
BTW, that minimum wage would shift 5% of income from the 55% who now take 90% of overall income to the 45% (or should we say shift 5% of income from the 54% who now take 70%?).
What are needed are non-skilled jobs that pay between $600 and $800 a week -- the same jobs that exist now but don't pay enough to keep 100,000 Chicago gang age males (out of approx 200,000) out of street gangs. My old job doesn't pay even near $800 any more: taxi driving (NYC, Chi, SF). Fast food work in Chi is owned by Mexican and Indian immigrants because American born wont work for so little (even $10 an hour minimum in Chi -- of course the min was $11 in 1968 when per capita income was half today's).
The money is there -- to pay people to work. If it isn't there we can forever forget about reducing poverty.