Posted on 01/07/2014 10:15:02 PM PST by Olog-hai
Republicans are in a pickle. The Senate is voting today to extend emergency unemployment insurance benefits. Democrats are talking up a sharp rise in the federal minimum wage. Most Republicans oppose those ideas, but they still want to show that they care about reducing poverty. What can they do? […]
Broadly there are two poverty problems in the United States. One is a cyclical trend: The labor market has been slack for the last five years, leaving many people involuntarily unemployed and limiting workers’ ability to bargain for higher wages. The other is secular: Labor’s share of national income is declining, wages are rising more slowly for low-skilled workers than high-skilled ones, and rises in family income at the bottom have come primarily through fiscal transfers, not wages.
These problems require different solutions, and Republican ideas don’t address either. On the cyclical side, Republicans favor a variety of policies that would make the unemployed and marginally employed worse off. They want to cut government benefits to the poor: they oppose extension of emergency Unemployment Insurance benefits, they want modest cuts to food stamps, they want to repeal the Medicaid expansion. Of course, Republicans don’t want the poor to live off government benefits; they want them to get jobs. Unfortunately, Republicans also oppose macroeconomic policies to promote full employment, such as deficit spending, infrastructure investment, and monetary stimulus. …
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Poverty can NEVER end when it is measured in percentages. The goal posts keep moving. Which is EXACTLY what the commies in government want.
“For the poor you have always with you: but Me you have not always.” Matthew 26:11
Yet another Left-leaning article from BI...
macroeconomic policies to promote full employment, such as deficit spending, infrastructure investment, and monetary stimulus. …
If that is the solution, why the hell do we have unemployment at all? I did not bother reading the full article that ended things for me.
What is "antipoverty?"
Is it called wealth? Economic growth? Jobs? Investments?
-PJ
The neologism itself makes it sound like it’s the antimatter version of poverty.
They are not opposites, as in poverty <--> wealth.
It's poverty <--> antipooverty.
So, what the heck is antipoverty? Will it explode if it touches poverty?
-PJ
Let me summarize. Democrat policies have increased the number of people in poverty and the Republicans have no plan to fix it that can overcome an 0bama veto should Harry Reid put that plan up for a vote in the Senate.
I have no doubt that extending unemployment benefits and increasing the minimum wage will help people keep their jobs. Unfortunately the people who it will help are Democrat legislators and government bureaucrats.
These “Extended Unemployment Benefits” are a Democrat strategist’s dream come true: a long-term entitlement that has to be voted on every three months, so the Republicans can constantly be portrayed to increasingly dependent voters as cruel and heartless.
communists spewing their evil which is derived from HELL ITSELF!
Correct. Helping the poor is not the job of government, it is the job of communities and churches.
We have had more than plenty of two of those three for the past 6 or so years.
When does it start working?
And you don't pile on entitlements that can never be paid for.
I just see no way out of this save for a major crisis that forces this. Even if conservatives were to win it all, I don't think the electorate has the stomach to actually do what needs to be done to get us out of this mess
There is no Constitutional authority for the fedgov to be doing anything about poverty.
In fact I’d hazard to say that 99% of poverty in this country is caused by fedgov activity
Yes, in theory that's their plan, it doesn't "exist" in any meaningful sense till they do something about it. Pass bills (yes, I know The Won will veto them, but make him do it), be on the stump 24/7 dragging people out of bed and telling them you know what would fix this and Democrats won't let you.
Gin up some political pressure on them and be more in charge of setting the agenda and spend less time reacting to their agenda.
Got it the first time, Joshing-Boy.
Leftist windbag.
In theory, I’m in favor of ending the excess unemployment benefits. It has never been my experience that subsidizing something leads to less of it.
In practice, I’d consider extending unemployment. The trick is that I’d pay for it by repealing H.R. 3590 (111th) and hope no one notices until it’s signed by the usurper that H.R. 3590 (111th) is ObamaCare. I’ll happily take the financial waste under extended unemployment if in return we removed the great evil that was inflicted when that terrible bill was rammed through.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.