The Census Bureau poverty data released today makes it clear that our country is facing a state of emergency. In just one year, 3.7 million more people, including 1.4 million children, fell into poverty. Today, more than one in five children is poor.
The depth of poverty created by the Great Recession is shocking. But it should not come as a surprise. With 15 million people out of work last year and many millions more with earnings too low to make ends meet, economists told us we should expect epidemic poverty. The only modest surprise is that poverty did not rise even more steeply, thanks in large part to expansions in Unemployment Insurance and temporary subsidized jobs put in place by the Obama Administration and Congress. Unemployment benefits alone kept 3.3 million people out of poverty, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. The Census Bureau reported that if food stamps and low-income tax credits were counted in its poverty calculation, the data would show that about 4 million more people were lifted out of poverty.
Despite this "good news" it is not an exaggeration to say that our country is facing a state of emergency. Poverty hits hardest where it will do the most damage. Children are disproportionately poor, and the youngest children are the poorest of all (more than one in four children younger than five is poor). These children are the most vulnerable to harm from inadequate nutrition&mdash their brain development is threatened and they are more likely to become sick or require hospitalization.
Many of their parents are working, but due to the recession their wages or hours have been reduced, pushing them below the poverty line—often significantly below. A mother with two children is considered poor if her income is below $17,285. But many have fallen even further into what is categorized as deep poverty -- or half the poverty level. The Census data shows that 19 million people were living in deep poverty in 2009 -- an increase of nearly 2 million over 2008.
Even before the recession took hold, 32 percent of Americans were living very modestly above the poverty line -- with little protection from lay-offs or lost work hours. The new Census data shows not only huge growth in the number of Americans living below the poverty line, but another increase in the "near poor." In 2009 more than 100 million people lived below 200 percent of the poverty line (about $34,000 for a three-person family), up from 96 million in 2008. At twice the poverty level, more than one-third of families have a tough time affording food or housing, according to the Urban Institute.
If a flood, fire or disease threatened even a fraction of the number of people living in or near poverty, we would not hesitate to declare a national emergency. We would do so both out of our sense of obligation to protect our neighbors and to prevent permanent economic loss, which affects us all. Our response to the income emergency facing our country should be no less immediate and far-reaching. The stakes are at least as great.
When emergency conditions strike, Americans have historically taken action to clear away the destruction and rebuild. Most people are ready to take action now. A poll conducted by Lake Research Partners, on behalf of the Ms. Foundation for Women and Center for Community Change, shows that a majority of Americans believe it is time for the government to take a larger, stronger role in making the economy work and providing economic security. But self-serving politicians, lobbyists and pundits are taking advantage of this time of hardship to press for precisely the wrong actions—cuts in the very services and benefits that protect those who were hurt most by the recession, while providing more tax breaks for those at the top of the income ladder.
Calling for hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts for the top two percent of earners while one-quarter of our children are poor is morally and economically wrong. Pretending that tax cuts of more than $100,000 a year for the wealthiest Americans will do as much for the economy as providing jobs and income support for the bottom 40 percent is wrong. Framing these cuts as aid to small business doesn't erase the truth. The Main Street Alliance, a group of small business people, has said loudly and often that its members don't earn enough to benefit from these breaks.
Some of those claiming that tax breaks for the top will trickle down are also brazen enough to blame the Obama Administration for the steep rise in poverty. The Administration proposed the policies that have helped. These include: Unemployment Insurance expansions; the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Emergency Fund, which has created more than 250,000 short-term jobs for low-income parents; improvements in the Child Tax Credit and Earned Income Tax Credit, which helped millions of families stay out of poverty; and an increase in food stamps, which allowed families to put more nutritious meals on the table.
While these policies did a lot of good they clearly did not go far enough. But contrast these productive steps with the actions of those who stood in the way and held up unemployment benefits or sought food stamp cuts. Look to see who holds hostage tax cuts for 98 percent of Americans, including the low-income tax credits, in order to get breaks for millionaires. See whose interest in deficit reduction extends to cutting jobs, education, health care and more, but whose concerns evaporate when it comes to upper income tax breaks.
Normally in this country we do not let political games stand in the way of a quick and humane response to dire emergencies. We can't let that happen now. We need to extend the TANF Emergency Fund for another year; continue the low-income tax credits; extend federal unemployment benefits past November; and support programs that create jobs so parents can protect their children from the damaging effects of poverty. This is a national crisis. We need to start acting that way.
Richard (RJ) Eskow: Austerity Chic: It's This Year's "Weapons of Mass Destruction"
You'll be lucky if 50% of the new tax dollars would go where it is most needed. We've already been told it's to pay the debt. At the same time you'll be draining billions of dollars out of investment and private spending dollars. Which will result in more unemployed and more in poverty.
We've been adding more and more to these poverty fighting programs for 60 years, and yet the poor keep growing. You've been so focused on the great things this magical taxed money (or printed) can do, and completely ignore the costs of taking that money away from others. And "they're rich, they can handle it" is not and economic cost analysis. You need to study the elasticity of high income, small business, inflation, and so on. Then you'll see the cost is far beyond the benefit.
Obama says that all is well.
Good luck.
However simple stimulus will work if we were not in the thrall of Oligarchs and their self serving charity.
We need to stop people from falling into poverty. Those already there need homes and maybe in some regions jobs could be provided building those homes.
They need food and other services: more jobs!
Old fashioned snowball economics could work if we did not protect the rich. If the Democrats could just return to the center from the right we could eradicate most poverty in 4 years. The poor are not the problem.
We are in debt fighting wars when we need to be in debt fighting poverty. Tax the rich and bring our troops home.
Create needed jobs and the poor can get PAY if they GO to work.
It's in their best interest if the economy is in the tank. They DON't Want things to get better, that way people think they are getting back at the people currently in power by voting the RepubiBillys back in when they are the cause of the continued poor economy in the first place. It's pathetic!
No Drama Obama needs to act like a Commander-in-Chief who recognizes a crises and takes crises management steps to alleviate the negative impacts of the crises. Following the advice of those who only support conventional wisdom leads to a wordsening crisis. Bernanke, Geithner and Summers have no idea of what 50 million suffering American endure. They cannot support what they don't acknowledge as being important, since there is no public hew and cry beseaching them to bailout the poor and middle class. They can only hear those closet to them....bankers and autocrats.
The President will soon learn that millions of Americans will decide that they have nothing to lose. When there is nothing to lose opposition to is the path millions will take to restore their lives for themselves and especially their children.
Does anyone really believe that if 100% (unlikely) of the revenue generated by raising those taxes, $70 Billion a year would really make any impact?
The budget for 2010 includes nearly $900 Billion for health and human services.
Only Democrats look at this situation and say it's proof we need more social programs and that's wrong...it's proof we need to create jobs.
We've had 50 years of social program after social program...and has poverty been changed at all? Nope. The only difference is our debt.
The GOP have a bad habit of painting everyone who is in need as lazy bums who don't want to work. Walk a mile in my shoes, my friend. You would know what it is like to lose everything due to job loss, divorce, severe health problems and a job market incredibly biased against older, displaced workers and who will not consider a person for a menial job due to a "background" credit check. Yes, I am bankrupt due to medical bills I simply can't afford to pay with no income. I pray you will be able to maintain your lifestyle and never go through what I am. Finally, what does this great country stand for if not our citizens health and well being? What is more important than that?
If you want to judge my compassion by how much I support government programs rather than individuals which I know, then so be it, but that makes you the fool, not me.
The difference is you and others like you believe Ameicans answers are solved with the actions of government. That is false. We won't solve any of Americas problems unless we work together as individuals accepting responsibility instead of passing that on to the rich through high taxes.
Imagine a cleaner running for president and winning? Imagine a waiter running for the Senate and winning? Imagine a nurse at a retirement home becoming Mayor of New York City? Imagine any Oligarch and you know they can on the whole choose their futures and play at being Governor.
The rich worked hard for their wealth? The poor work hard too but cannot choose and must be grateful we no longer throw them in the poor house.
It is not just the poor who do not vote in an election as 90% of us are irrelevant to the needs of a member of Congress. Only the rich matter. It was not always so: Lincoln once said that he could ignore the wealthy lobbying him as there were so few of them compared to the majority. What went wrong?
Our values are wrong when we elect year in and year out the corrupt hoping this time they will do what they promised to do: help all of us have a better life. I still hear Obama boasting about HCR but one part of it now enacted is too expensive for most of us with a precondition. In America without wealth HCR is next to useless if you cannot afford the premium. And we wonder why the poor get no attention?
There are millions of Americans living in real poverty but above the statistical poverty line.
And there is not likely to be substantive change in what you describe for quite some time.
This change will not occur because we have,
no effective leadership support within the national and state capitols,
no effective and independent national media,
no effective objective academic/intellectual voices, and
no popular movement opposing the status quo.
Until one or all of the above takes ascendance, in this nation, we will continue down the cliff of economic and social depression.
.
Sure, taking money from someone else is always an option. The problem is that it is too easy an option for some.
I worked hard for my money and I am probably in the best position to determine how to spend it or give it to one of my local charities that I feel is doing real good in MY neighborhood.
Sometimes bad stuff happens to good people and it should not be taken as an ‘inalienable’ right that they have a right to other people’s money when it happens. Sometimes you gotta role with the punches, pick your self up, and make it under your own steam. Not reach into someone’s pocket at the slightest provocation.
Finally, if people want to help the poor, let them do it with their money, not my money or other people’s money. I worked for it and it should be MY right to give, not their right to take. Wouldn’t you agree?
Kai
Look at it this way. Over the years, generation after generation have challenged the use of their tax dollars to finance war. Our Supreme Court has held that "their" contribution to the national largess was miniscule; could not be uniquely traced to appropriation; and theorectically might have been used to purchase a toilet seat, for example. Likewise, your tax dollars might be going directly to the troops. Now, that would make you feel nice, wouldn't it? So, rest easy.
Be Cool......
Does the USA still stock pile anything in case of extreme emergencys anymore ?
Besides the oil pumped into the old salt mines ??????
Want to change the system to something more equitable and less inflationary? Let's move to a "resource based" economy instead of a "labor based" economy. Every citizen is paid a royalty for the ownership rights to our nation's resources. This payment would be a guaranteed subsistance level income including basic health care. The corporations then would have to actually compete for your business and provide services to the citizens. Labor would be a commodity that would have more value, as it wouldn't be necessary to survival, and mechanization and technical innovation would finally take the place they should have in this century. Most of all, people wouldn't be valued only according to their ability to enrich the corporation and they would have power over their own destinies again.
Is giving American citizens their rightful due for the nation's resources, that now end up as freebies to corporations, any more extreme than a fractional reserve banking system that Wall St depends upon and charges off to all Americans? Nations that don't have an irrational fear of "socialism" kick our butts in almost every catagory that is important to citizens. It is only in worker productivity (certainly not wages paid for that productivity) and lifestyle of our spoiled rich that America excels. It's time to rebuild it from the ground up and start this Monopoly game over again with better rules.
You mean those people who are given all kind of tax payer subsudies like housing , vactions, and tax free income to provide some of the best Medical Care in the world ?
Oh, You think people only come to the USA for Medical Care ? Well Wealthy People go to the BEST Doctor who can take them when they are sick ! And sometimes it is the USA but not always .
But the Corporations are trying to OWN the Natural Resources instead of use them and pay the Country that owns them for the access to them a fair price.
Eventually, everyone in society is on the hook for this money, either via taxation or inflation, but the wealthy get to treat it as their property and inflate it farther by charging interest upon it as they dole it out downward. Wondering why a car costs what a decent house did just 30 years ago? That is the natural effect of this perverted system and the way you pay the wealthy for the "privilege" of working for them.
"Screw you, and the elephant you rode in on. Even wifebeaters eventually learn an important truth: You have to sleep sometime. Sooner or later, the new "Third World" workers of the U.S. will slam a cast iron frying pan upside your sleeping heads. Because once you rig the game, and buy off the refs, well, people won't care anymore about sportsmanship." ~Susie Madrak~