#poverty is a policy choice

[porterdavis]

Poverty is a policy choice

The Atlantic has an unflinching look at how the US is such a bad actor when it comes to poverty, especially child poverty, compared to the rest of the developed world. President Biden's Extended Child Tax Credit passed in his first year in office lifted 40% of the families living in poverty out of poverty, a stunning result achieved at a relatively small cost. The Republicans killed it.

There are tremendous knock-on benefits to lifting people out of poverty - healthcare costs go down, crime goes down, tax bases are widened, welfare rolls are reduced, productivity goes up. All these are well known. So why does America fall so short? Here are a few points from the article to consider:

Housing is typically the largest expense for a household. “Municipal zoning ordinances, enacted through referenda pushed by citizens’ groups and homeowners’ associations, and which prohibit the construction of multifamily apartment complexes in upscale neighborhoods, is a case in point. These benign-sounding rules foster segregation, effectively preventing the poor ... from moving in. Such policies are one of the few issues that Americans in red and blue states seem to agree on."

So yes, the NIMBY effect of the 'rich' forces the poor to live out of sight, unable to benefit from the schools, parks, and appreciation in property values enjoyed by the wealthy.

The financial structure favours the wealthy in a variety of ways. "When the wealthy patronize shops and restaurants that offer low prices and fast service, their satisfaction comes at the expense of cashiers and dishwashers paid poverty wages. When we open free checking accounts that require maintaining a minimum balance, we benefit from the fact that banks can collect billions of dollars in overdraft fees from poor customers who struggle to meet these requirements—and who often end up gouged by check-cashing outlets and payday lenders."

The notion that the government subsidizes the poor while taxing the rich does not take into consideration the massive tax benefits homeowners have with the mortgage interest deduction and state and local tax write-offs. Indeed, "the average household in the top 20 percent income bracket receives $35,363 in annual tax breaks and other government benefits—40 percent more than the average household in the bottom 20 percent."

"What is “maddening,” Desmond writes, is “how utterly easy it is to find enough money to defeat poverty by closing nonsensical tax loopholes,” or by doing 20 or 30 smaller things to curtail just some of the subsidies of affluence."

His bleak conclusion:

"Getting affluent people to engage in rhetorical hand-wringing over inequality is easy enough. Persuading them to yield some of their entitlements is a lot harder."

#poverty is a policy choice #the atlantic #nimby

[originalleftist]

If you knew nothing else about the Republican Party... wouldn't this be enough?

#Health Care #Republican Child Abusers #Poverty Is A Policy Choice #Vote Blue

[acronymking4tdp]

"The opposite of poverty isn't wealth. The opposite of poverty is justice."

I heard this quote at a rally sponsored by The Poor Peoples' Campaign at the state capitol last weekend. The quote is by lawyer Bryan Stevenson, so I looked him up and watch the linked TEDTalk. It was one of the better TEDTalks I've ever heard, and at barely 23 minutes it won't take up too much time. Although he most directly talks about issues in the US, his message has universal applicability.

#acronymking4tdp #ted talks #social justice #poverty is a policy choice #social injustice

[amandaroos]

When I was in my first job out of college, one of my coworkers died. She was in her 40s and had kids in middle school. It was absolutely heartbreaking. And traumatizing.

That was the worst and most stressful job I ever had. I quit a few months later. I always wonder if that coworker would have lived longer if we had something like universal basic income. Maybe those kids would still have their mom if she had been less stressed about money.

#ubi #universalbasicincome #guaranteedincome #endpoverty #solvepoverty #povertyisapolicychoice

#ubi #universal basic income #guaranteed income #end poverty #solve poverty #poverty is a policy choice

[nando161mando]

My policy choice..

#My policy choice.. #foreign policy #policy #choices #choice #ausgov #politas #auspol #tasgov #taspol #australia #fuck neoliberals #neoliberal capitalism #anthony albanese #albanese government #poverty #homeless #capitalism #anti capitalist #washington capitals #capitalist hell #capitalist dystopia #eat the rich #eat the fucking rich #anti capitalism #anticapitalista #anti capitalist love notes #anticapitalistically #slavery #wage slavery

[devonellington]

Fri. June 23, 2023: I'd Rather Read & Relax

image courtesy of Candice via pixabay.com Friday, June 23, 2023 Waxing Moon Pluto & Saturn Retrograde Sunny and warmer I can’t believe it’s the end of another week. To me, this week has been one long day. My neighbors have a standing hammock on their wrap around porch and lie there to read. I think it’s a great idea. Today’s serial episode is from Angel Hunt: Episode 44: The Randolph…

View On WordPress

#"Summon Thee" #ANGEL HUNT #Clark #client work #Deadly Dramatics #groceries #Legerdemain #library #mansplainer #poverty as policy choice #Process Muse #sense memory stress #social media #Titan

[the-greatest-fool]

I basically only post and read posts in my bubble aside from occasionally scrolling through Real Tumblr, but people’s takes about US politics on this website are fucking unbelievable. They talk about our government as if it didn’t save us from a pandemic-induced financial collapse, pump trillions of dollars into public works, not to mention substantially invest and rein in pharmaceuticals, and is instead some sort of ultra-neoliberal-corporate kitty shooting machine.

Like let’s be for real. Do they…know what the government does? How it works? Do you know what a conservative is? Do you know what an authoritarian is?

Because a system of government whose citizens are all lucky it has had continuous peaceful transfer of power for centuries could very well have its greatest norm violated—that those who reject its legitimacy must be rejected—and we don’t blink an eye.

Because the first major investment against climate change, coupled with life saving investments into healthcare, cancer research, and drug costs could be shredded by indiscriminate fiscal conservatives who don’t care if we die in forest fires, cancer from pollution, lose insurance because we’re jobless, or, apparently, all die in a fricking plague.

Because a foreign policy establishment that had finally reversed two decades of foreign intervention in favor of a normalization strategy aimed at reducing American foot presence, drone strikes, and indiscriminate killings is about to be replaced by the whims of a man who dropped the “mother of all bombs” on the Middle East, gave American soldiers up to Russian bounty hunters, extorted a foreign leader for political favors and arguably indirectedly resulted in that country being BRUTALLY INVADED BY AN IMPERIAL NEIGHBOR, is in the pockets of CCP-funded billionaires, and WANTS TO “FINISH THE JOB” IN GAZA.

Because a President who is against family separations and promotes a path for DREAMERs and more legal immigration and rights for unodcumented people could be replaced by a man who wants to separate families, PUT UNDOCUMENTED PEOPLE IN CONCENTRATION CAMPS, RESTRICT EVEN LEGAL IMMIGRATION, ESPECIALLY THAT OF MUSLIMS, AND SHOOT MIGRANTS.

Because a President who stopped a repeat of the Great Recession and the painful decade that followed it with strong fiscal stimulus which CUT CHILD POVERTY IN HALF BEFORE CONSERVATIVES MADE IT EXPIRE, then managed to cut deficits and presided over a decline in inflation, resulting in record high real wages (aka taking into account inflation) for workers is going to be replaced by a President who wants to TARIFF ALL FOREIGN GOODS by 15%, CUT TAXES FOR THE FILTHY RICH AND THE TAX ENFORCEMENT TO STOP THEM, INCREASE CHILD POVERTY AND UNINSUREDNESS by cutting gov’t programs, and HURT UNIONS which by every measure will lead to lower wages, higher prices, and more poverty and starvation.

Because a President who has pledged to sign a bill codifying Roe v. Wade (which has yet to be possible in recent memory, whatever these kids say), who enshrined the right to marry someone of the same sex or different race, who supports the Equality Act which would enshrine LGBTQ protections into the law, could be replaced by THE MAN WHO REMOVED AMERICA’S RIGHT TO ABORTION, whose Christian nationalist supporters want to END SEXUAL FREEDOM as we know it including TARGETING IVF AND BIRTH CONTROL, who wants to reverse LGBTQ discrimination law in favor of Christian bigots who hate queer and trans people, and who demonizes that community to win political support.

Ask yourself if you really think there’s no difference between the two. Ask yourself if a reasonable person given these facts would choose the latter. Ask yourself why you see so much propagandizing against the reasonable choice. Ask yourself why so many people seem to have opinions on this when they “don’t even go here”.

Maybe I’m just preaching to the choir here. Maybe people who say this inane stuff wouldn’t vote anyways. Maybe somehow we’re screwed anyways. Maybe people will stupidly vote third party and we’re fucked. Maybe this will get me attacked.

I don’t care anymore. If I have to see one more fucking post acting like we live under the fucking Evil Empire while a SELF PROCLAIMED DICTATOR is about to end the best streak of decent governance I’ve ever seen in a while, I just can’t anymore.

#us politics #abortion rights #abortion #biden #trump #joe biden #election 2024 #climate change #climate crisis #gaza #palestine #israel #middle east #christian nationalism #lgbtq #trans rights #poverty #economy #economics #politics #healthcare #human rights #immigration #misinformation #disinformation #donald trump #american

[robertreich]

The Truth Behind “Self-Made” Billionaires

Why do we glorify “self-made” billionaires?

Well, being “self-made” is a seductive idea —it suggests that anybody can get to the top if they're willing to work hard enough. It’s what the American Dream is all about.

If Kylie Jenner can become a “self-made” billionaire at age 21, so can you and I!

Even as wages stay stagnant and wealth inequality grows, it’s a comfort to think that we’re all simply one cosmetics company and some elbow grease away from fortune.

Unfortunately, a nice idea is all it is. Self-made billionaires are a myth. Just like unicorns.

The origins of self-made billionaires are often depicted as a “rags-to-riches” rise to the top fueled by nothing but personal grit and the courage to take risks — like dropping out of college, or starting a business in a garage.

But in reality, the origins of many billionaires aren’t so humble. They’re more “riches-to-even-more-riches” stories, rooted in upper-middle class upbringings.

How much risk did Bill Gates take on when his mother used her business connections to help Microsoft land a deal-making software for IBM?

Elon Musk came from a family that owned an emerald mine during the time of Apartheid South Africa.

Jeff Bezos’ garage-based start was funded by a quarter-million dollar investment from his parents.

If your safety net to joining the billionaire class is remaining upper class – that’s not pulling yourself up by your bootstraps.

Nor is failing to pay your fair share of taxes along the way.

Along with Musk and Bezos, Michael Bloomberg, George Soros, and Carl Icahn have all gotten away with paying ZERO federal income taxes some years. That’s a big helping hand, courtesy of legal loopholes and American taxpayers who pick up the tab, all while our tax dollars subsidize the corporations owned by these so-called “self-reliant” entrepreneurs.

Did you get a thank you card from any of them? I sure as hell didn’t.

Other common ways that billionaires build their coffers off the backs of others include paying garbage wages and subjecting workers to abusive labor conditions.

But portraying themselves as rugged individuals who overcame poverty or “did it on their own” remains an effective propaganda tool for the ultrawealthy. One that keeps workers from rising up collectively to demand fairer wages – and one that ultimately distracts from the role that billionaires play in fostering poverty in the first place.

Billionaires say their success proves they can spend money more wisely and efficiently than the government. Well they have no problem with government spending when it comes to corporate subsidies.

When arguing for even more tax breaks, they claim each “dollar the government takes from [them] is a dollar less” for their “critical” role in expanding prosperity for all Americans, through job creation and philanthropy. Well that’s rubbish.

50 years of tax cuts for the wealthy have failed to trickle down. As a result of Trump’s tax cuts, 2018 saw the 400 richest American families pay a lower tax rate than the middle class. And U.S. billionaire wealth grew by $2 trillion during the first two years of a pandemic that was economically catastrophic for just about everyone else. They want to have their cake, everyone else’s cake, and eat it, too.

Behind every ten-figure net worth is systemic inequality. Inherited wealth. Labor exploitation. Tax loopholes. And government subsidies.

To claim these fortunes are “self-made” is to perpetuate a myth that blames the wealth gap on the choices of everyday Americans.

Billionaires are not made by rugged individuals. They’re made by policy failures. And a system that rewards wealth over work.

Know the truth.

#youtube #video #videos #billionaires #money #wealth #inequality #economics #elon musk #jeff bezos #tesla #amazon

[gatheringbones]

[“There is not one banking sector. There are two—one for the poor and one for the rest of us—just as there are two housing markets and two labor markets. The duality of American life can make it difficult for some of us who benefit from the current arrangement to remember that the poor are exploited laborers, exploited consumers, and exploited borrowers, precisely because we are not. Many features of our society are not broken, just bifurcated. For some, a home creates wealth; for others, a home drains it. For some, access to credit extends financial power; for others, it destroys it.

It is quite understandable, then, that well-fed Americans can be perplexed by the poor, even disappointed in them, believing that they accept stupidly bad deals on impulse or because they don’t know any better. But what if those deals are the only ones on offer? What good is financial literacy training for people forced to choose the best bad option?

Poverty isn’t simply the condition of not having enough money. It’s the condition of not having enough choice and being taken advantage of because of that. When we ignore the role that exploitation plays in trapping people in poverty, we end up designing policy that is weak at best and ineffective at worst. When legislation lifts incomes at the bottom—say, by expanding the Child Tax Credit or by raising the minimum wage—without addressing the housing crisis, those gains are often recouped by landlords, not wholly by the families the legislation was intended to help. A 2019 study conducted by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia found that when states raised minimum wages, families found it easier to pay rent. But landlords quickly responded to the wage bumps by increasing rents, which diluted the effect of the policy. (This happened after the COVID-19 rescue packages, too, but commentators preferred discussing the matter using the bloodless language of inflation.)

In Tommy Orange’s début novel, There There, a man trying to describe the problem of suicides on Native American reservations says, “Kids are jumping out the windows of burning buildings, falling to their deaths. And we think the problem is that they’re jumping.” The poverty debate has suffered from a similar kind of myopia. For the past half century, we’ve approached the poverty question by attending to the poor themselves—posing questions about their work ethic, say, or their welfare benefits—when we should have been focusing on the fire. The question that should serve as a looping incantation, the one we should ask every time we drive past a tent encampment, those tarped American slums smelling of asphalt and bodies, every time we see someone asleep on the bus, slumped over in work clothes, is simply: Who benefits? Not Why don’t you find a better job? or Why don’t you move? or Why don’t you stop taking out such bad loans? but Who is feeding off this?”]

matthew desmond, from poverty: by america, 2023

#matthew desmond #history stuff #currently reading #cw suicide

[soberscientistlife]

Poverty is a policy choice

#vote blue #vote democrat #vote biden

[porterdavis]

Poverty is a policy choice.

[acronymking4tdp]

March 2, 2024 -- Save the Date!

A DAY OF NATIONALLY-COORDINATED, SIMULTANEOUS DIRECT ACTION ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

GATHER AT 10AM, MARCH AT 11AM

This is happening in every state (not just in Raleigh) - be loud and proud, and bring a friend. Learn more HERE

#poor people's campaign #us politics #poverty is a policy choice #2 MARCH 2024 #get involved #moral March on your state capitol

[starseedpatriot]

Regarding UN Sustainable Development Goals

An excellent reply by Alexandra Latypova when asked how her company would meet the UN SDG’s:

“UN is an unelected, unaccountable organization whose pronouncements have no bearing on our company's bylaws, management principles and corporate governance. We resent the implication that they do.  

We do not support UN's "Sustainable Development Goals" and related ideology as we believe it is vague, self-contradictory, unimplementable and overall damaging framework designed to promote the interests of wealthy and powerful individuals and corporations at the expense of the working people globally. 

"Sustainability" is a purposefully undefined but pleasantly sounding nonsense.  The 17 "goals" made up by overpaid bureaucrats are designed to obfuscate the reality - the monopolizing of control over the world's resources and subjugation of the people who never consented to be governed in this manner.  

As an example of absurdity, the core of the SDG program for development and poverty reduction relies on industrial growth — ever-increasing levels of extraction, production, and consumption.

Goal 8 calls for 7% annual GDP growth in the least developed countries and higher levels of economic productivity across the board, calling for less and more at the same time.  

The most recent example of SDG in action is the devastating collapse of the entire country of Sri Lanka precipitated by capricious "sustainability" burdens such as bans on fertilizer and ban on non-organic farming which led to widespread hardship and civil unrest. 

Widespread protests of farmers are currently ongoing in the Netherlands and other European countries.  The hardworking people are pushed to the brink of despair by the SDG inspired "green" nonsense while UN's corporate sponsors like Bill Gates are simultaneously purchasing all arable land in sight. 

“Sustainable water" agenda comes with Nestle's sponsorship which aims to have all freshwater on Earth owned by corporations. 

“Health" goals are sponsored by the global pharmaceutical companies and, unsurprisingly, aim at increasing government purchases of drugs, elimination of individual health choices and informed consent as already demonstrated by the global covid-19 policies to date. 

In summary, we do not support UN and its agenda 2030.  We think nobody should. 

Collectivist utopias have led to devastation both human and environmental every single time they were attempted, and UN's SDG is yet another attempt. 

We strongly believe in the individual rights to free thought, expression and self-determination, as only truly free individuals can build a just, moral, non-fraudulent society for common good.”

https://t.me/LauraAbolichannel

[thatsonemorbidcorvid]

“The overwhelming majority of women sign up to surrogacy because of poverty, and financial coercion is not a choice. The surrogacy industry is simply the reproductive brothel.

But what about those women that do genuinely offer their womb for use by an infertile couple or individual, an altruistic rather than commercial surrogacy? What right do I or any feminist have to say that she should not be allowed or able to do that? As with prostitution, I would never tell women that they don’t have a right to do what they wish with their bodies, but I do feel I have not just a right but an imperative to name and deter those who create the demand for surrogacy. Yes, a minority of women do enter into a surrogacy arrangement without being coerced by either poverty or an exploiter. But such women are, like the happy hooker, atypical. Laws and policy are not made for the tiny minority, and laws also send out a messages to wider society. The choice argument applied to surrogacy is a neoliberal one, in that those supporting the practice look only at the individuals who benefit directly from it, as opposed to the effect that commercialisation of women’s wombs has on wider society generally and women’s status specifically.”

- Julie Bindel, Feminism for Women

#feminism for women #julie bindel

[ms-cellanies]

IMHO THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLE YOU WILL READ TODAY. If the American people & our elected officials were paying attention then we would realize that where a very large percentage of the American people & families are living in a 3rd World country.

There are an enormous number of Americans who are living in serious POVERTY. As far as I'm concerned the 2 MOST IMPORTANT PROBLEMS FACING AMERICA are POVERY & CLIMATE CHANGE. Our elected officials, in both parties, have no problem CONTINUING TO RAISE THE MONEY FOR THE MILITARY & WAR. Neither party seems to be concerned about the Americans who are suffering because they don't have enough money to live on. RepubliKKKans, especially, want to decrease every program that does benefit the working poor. Not only MUST WE VOTE BLUE but we also must elect candidates who will address POVERTY, HOMELESSNESS & CLIMATE CHANGE.

PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE & SHARE IT WITH ALL OF YOUR FOLLOWERS

[gehayi]

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, [Katie] Rinderle had offered her fifth grade gifted program students a choice of books to read and discuss, and they chose Scott Stuart’s “My Shadow is Purple,” which you can check out here. The book centers on a child who looks at their mother’s pink shadow and their father’s blue shadow and doesn’t identify fully with either. Their shadow is purple, and they have traits in common with each of their parents. At a school dance, the child is pressured to choose pink or blue, but ultimately, other kids speak out to say that actually, their shadows aren’t pink or blue, either—they’re yellow, brown, red, green. Rinderle, who is obviously an excellent teacher, then had her students discuss the book’s themes and write poems about their own shadows. :::

Two days after she read “My Shadow is Purple” to her class, Rinderle was summoned to the principal’s office twice for meetings. “When I asked why this book was available in our school’s recent Scholastic Book Fair, especially if it was not deemed ‘appropriate,’ there was not a clear answer that could be given,” she told the SPLC. “When I asked if there was a specific list of books or topics that were not allowed in inclusive libraries, the principal stated, ‘No.’ When I asked if there was a rule or policy I was unaware of, she told me she wasn’t sure and she believed it was just considered ‘divisive.’ She told me parents were ‘talking’ and had emailed to complain.” That message came through repeatedly: The rules are vague. It doesn’t matter, because we’ve decided you broke them.

#censorship laws #bad laws #my shadow is purple #katie rinderle #goddamned georgia (state)