Edwards Unveils Plan to Cut U.S. Poverty

[LiviaOlivia]

February 25, 2004
By REUTERS

Filed at 6:00 p.m. ET

CLAREMONT, Calif. (Reuters) - Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards on Wednesday unveiled a plan that he said would lift 10 million Americans out of poverty and cut the poverty rate.

<snip>

``For too long Washington has dealt with these problems by dismissing them as things that our country must live with,'' Edwards told a cheering crowd of mostly students packed into an auditorium at Pomona College.

``So many poor Americans, are invisible where they are ignored, unseen and unheard. For so long, Washington has been able to dismiss poverty as a personal problem, a drug problem,'' he said. ``Poverty has many causes but the biggest cause of all is the silence of people who can do something about it.''

<snip>

In order to help reduce the number of people below the poverty level, Edwards proposed raising the minimum wage by at least $1.50, raising tax credits for the working poor and increasing earned income tax credits.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/politics/politics-campaign-edwards.html

[unfrigginreal]

1. Thank you, Senator Edwards

Poverty has many causes but the biggest cause of all is the silence of people who can do something about it.

The truth and nothing but the truth.

[DuctapeFatwa]

2. It's a shrewd move. According to the government's figures

the average apartment now costs almost 4 times the minimum wage.

While raising the minimum wage by $1.50 would not have much effect on minimum wage earners themselves, voters generally comprise the top 25% income tier, and those who consider themselves "liberal" will find this proposal attractive, without raising the spectre of being unsupportive of business interests.

[tobius]

3. may be a shrewd move, but does it solve the problem? nt

[DuctapeFatwa]

4. Doesn't he support more police for cities to lock up the homeless?

If he doesn't. he should consider it. Businesses are not helped by dirty, scruffy runny-nosed children lolling around the doors and driving away customers.

bush has left the states almost bankrupt, without the funds necessary to clean up commercial areas.

[AP]

8. Republicans want robo cops and robo soldiers. Dems want people to have

jobs, good jobs, including jobs as police officers, and they want them on foot patrol, getting to know the citizens, and this is a bad thing?

[DuctapeFatwa]

9. Good point. How would a robo-cop be able to tell if it's a homeless person

or an employed American just standing still for a minute. And if the robo cop happened to lock up somebody with enough money for a lawyer, the city could end up getting sued, and be back to struggling for the money to lock up the homeless.

[spooky3]

7. No problem that has been created by decades of inadequate

response can be solved easily or in a short time. But he is proposing some actions to begin to address the problems.

[DuctapeFatwa]

12. It depends on which problem you mean

If you mean Edwards' problem in appearing more liberal to voters who like to think of themselves as liberals, you're right.

Addressing the problem of people who can't afford a roof over their head or food for their kid is not really relevant in an election, those people don't vote in large numbers, and they very seldom contribute to political campaigns.

[spooky3]

5. I think you mean 4 times the affordability (e.g., less than 33% of

one's gross pay). If a minimum wage worker worked 40 hours per week each month, the monthly pay (gross) would be a bit less than $850 per month. That would probably cover rent in small apartments in most towns and cities, but no taxes, food, clothing, transportation, health care, etc. In other words, rent alone would not be 4 times $850 or over $3400 per month but the rent would be much more than 1/4 or even 1/3 of one's gross pay.

[DuctapeFatwa]

14. I mean the price of a day's labor is below the price of a day's survival

With apologies to bush, you're either for that, or you're against it.

If your rent is $1000 and you have $600, and I give you $10, go offer your landlord $610 and show him Edwards' website.

[spooky3]

32. Sorry, you need to go back to math class. Please review my earlier post.

There is no argument that no one can live alone on $5.15 per hour even in cheap cities. There are empirical questions though, that can be answered, such as how much money an extra $1.50 per hour will bring each month and what is the effect of a change of $1.50 per hour on employment. Then there are complex questions about what is the right thing to do and what is politically feasible.

I understand that Edwards' proposals will not satisfy socialists, but I don't think that is his claim, nor does he claim that his proposal will entirely solve problems. All of his proposals are incremental. And there are many of us who are not socialists, and are more realistic about what can actually be accomplished by an incoming President, who support him.

[DuctapeFatwa]

33. A living wage for a day's work is not socialism

In fact, it is one of the fundamentals of capitalism.

When the price of a day's labor falls below the price of a day's survival, which it has, by a considerable margin, you no longer have capitalism, you have feudalism.

The worker no longer has the incentive to work and make more profit for management in the hopes that a benefit will accrue to him, he does not even have the incentive of working to earn his daily bread.

Payment for work is neither a gift, nor a charitable act, nor a socialist utopian concept. It is the principle that keeps YOUR belly full, and keeps Mr Edwards in fancy suits.

[AP]

Right. Dont' give them anything if you're not going to give them

everything.

This is the core of liberalism: make sure the value of labor -- the only thing you have to sell if you have nothing at all -- is as high as possible.

I really can't believe that I'm reading on a Democratic site criticisms of this.

[DuctapeFatwa]

10. Give? I thought we were talking about whether Americans who work 40

hours a week should be able to afford the basic necessities.

[AP]

11. Core value of liberalism: raise the value of work, since it's the only

thing most people have to sell.

I can't believe you're criticizing that.

[DuctapeFatwa]

13. As long as it's "raised" to still be below the price of survival

it's pretty damn irrelevant.

[AP]

16. I highly doubt that you speak for people who make minimum wage.

I really doubt they're thinking, "don't give us anything unless you give us everything."

[DuctapeFatwa]

17. I have no doubt that they will be delighted to be thrown into the street

with their buck fifty from Edwards gratefully clutched in their raw, cracked hands, and as they watch their childrens' toes turn black, they can touch the token of Edwards' love to the little feet, hush, dear, see! John Edwards believes your life is worth this much.

[AP]

18. For those on the street now, it might put a roof over their heads.

For those struggling, and in homes, it will only make their lives easier.

What the Republicans really don't want is people using this money to pay down debt.

The bottom quintile of Americas is in debt an average of 8900 bucks. They're probably paying interest to banks anywhere between 3% to 21% on that debt. The banks are going to get their money so long as their customers are minimally employed.

What the banks don't want is that bottom quintile paying down principle and interest, thus reducing the profit from interest.

[DuctapeFatwa]

19. Sounds good. Go get a job for minwage plus a buck fifty, let me know

I would be in favor of Edwards doing it too.

[AP]

21. What's your logic? I don't want a job at $X-(1.50)/hr. I'd rather have the

$X/hr job.

If Edwards is promising that, that's good.

It's the definition of 'flowing economic power down to people who work for a living.'

That's a core liberal theme.

[DuctapeFatwa]

27. Ah, the trickle down theory. yes, a liberal classic

How better to showcase the magnanimity than when Lord Bountiful graciously lets an extra crumb fall from his groaning table into the thankful hands of his most humble servant.

Even though the crumb be too small to repel the shrouded spectre of starvation scratching at the belly, the benign glow of his master's love fills the humble heart, and though his soul slip from his wracked body that very night, it does so wreathed in joy and gratitude.

[AP]

39. Trickle down is when you increase the MAXIMUM wage and leave untouched

the minimum wage, and cross your fingers and hope the money makes it down to the bottom.

Increasing the minimum wage is the OPPOSITE of TRICKLE down. It's DELIVER DOWN -- it's cutting out the rich middle man and giving the money directly to the poor.

DUHHHHH!!!!!!!!

[DuctapeFatwa]

45. When the situation reaches this level of crisis, it's the same

Delivering down a token gesture is fine, as long as you recognize that that's what it is. I'm sure Mr Edwards does.

And you can be sure that the people who will still be unable to support themselves will.

If Edwards is your candidate, why not concentrate on his strengths instead of calling attention to his weak points?

His neighborhood TIPS program, for example. Kerry doesn't have one.

That may not be a big concern on DU, but in the heartland, tough on terror is a plus. Go for it.

[spooky3]

6. He has had these specifics on his website a long time

It sounds as though he's decided to bring more of them into his stump speeches.

[Paulie]

15. Poverty is a WMD

[no name no slogan]

20. He needs to raise the minimum wage by MORE than $1.50

That will barely get it to $7/hr, which is STILL below the poverty line for most families.

What we need to pass is a LIVABLE WAGE law, that gives ALL workers enough money to live on, as well as universal health coverage, so they don't get nailed trying to pay for health care.

The moment Edwards comes out for REAL reforms, I'll get on board. But this is just tinkering around the edges compared to what REALLY needs to be done.

[tobius]

22. how about mandating $49.75 an hour?

that should be good for many who are struggling.

[no name no slogan]

24. You're clever. So, how's that working out for you, being clever?

[tobius]

29. not sure, I was trying to illustrate the foolishness

many here seem to think it's great positioning, or talking about it is important, just as long as we can feel good about "doing" something". Raising the minimum wage doesn't address poverty, if it did $49.75 would at least raise the poverty level high enough so that the poor could at least start pricing plasma tv's.

[no name no slogan]

31. My apologies

I'm not quite that clever, unfortunately :dunce:

I agree with you about "feeling good" about something. I grew up in a neighborhood that was somewhat liberal, with a lot of nice white people who did nice things for the poor because it made them "feel good".

And I'm sure that many folks think that a $1.50 in the minimum wage will "do the trick" for many poor folks. That $1.50 will barely make a difference for most folks, considering the rising cost of healthcare and housing and transportation costs. I know for sure that in my city (Minneapolis), $60 won't go very far.

And still, we're not addressing the ROOT problem: the need for a Livable Wage law. Until we pass this, any sort of "increase" will be quite meaningless, unfortunately.

[SangamonTaylor]

25. i'd take it

This year with my tuition increasing so much and my stafford loans staying the same, I'm strapped .

[AP]

23. Every journey begins with a single step. Should we give up all the ....

...incremental increases in the minimum wage over the last 50 years just because they never went far enough?

Let's take 1.50 now, and in 8 months, and then 6 months and another 4 months....

[no name no slogan]

26. We've seen this all before

and I KNOW exactly what happens. Edwards throws the working poor "a bone" of $1.50 an hour, and when we complain that it's just a token, we get criticized for being "ungrateful" at best, and "not knowing our place" at worst.

Another southern moderate pulled this same bullshit on us in 1992, promising to work for the interest of the poor, saying that he "feels our pain". And once he got elected, he started caving in to the Rethugs faster than you can say "don't ask, don't tell".

NOBODY gets excited about candidates who promise "incremental change" to an already flawed system. Why? Because we've all heard it before from other politicians.

This is just another example of trying to put a band-aid on a cancer tumor. It won't do anything to stop the REAL problem, but it will sure make the guy putting on the band-aid feel better about himself.

[SangamonTaylor]

28. the greatest impact is not the 1.50, it's actually talking about the issue

of poverty.

Silence is the biggest problem and there's only one person talking.

[no name no slogan]

30. Talk is cheap

Sorry, but Edwards is not the only one talking about poverty. But, if you get all your news from the mainstream media, I can see how you'd be led to believe that. :D

Talking about the issue is fine, but it doesn't put more money in the pockets of poor people. I've spent PLENTY of my life as an activist talking about poverty and worker's rights, but I still haven't raised the minimum wage to a livable level.

Talk may play well in the homes of the guilty middle- and upper-class, but it won't feed my kids, or buy them school clothes, or pay for their doctors visits.

Candidates all talk a good line about "helping" the little folks, but their actions speak louder than their words.

Didn't Edwards vote against a Senate bill that would have raised the minimum wage by $1?

[DuctapeFatwa]

35. Maybe Edwards supporters can go talk to all the landlords

The biggest problem is that the price of a day's labor has fallen below the price of a day's survival.

That is past talk, that is past a dollar fifty, or an increment, or a task force, or a plan.

That is economic Code Red. Sucking chest wound.

Throwing a band-aid on it as you walk by, and talking about it till the cows come home ain't going to save your patient.

[Kanary]

37. Talk doesn't put a meal on the table

Or clothe the kids for school.

Or provide a healthy life.

The poor have already heard all the talk.

Until/unless we get another Dem with a spine, who is ready to breathe life back into the New Deal, the poor will turn a deaf ear to you.

Find a spine Dems... time is running out!

Kanary

[AP]

41. I'm wondering if the critics of this idea know the first thing about being

poor and about economics.

If I were a Republican, all this criticism of this plan would really make me happy.

[AP]

40. This is some of the most hostile anti-poor rhetoric I've read in a while.

It's amazing that it's on DU.

[DuctapeFatwa]

34. Listen, if you raised it to $300 an hour and you still couldn't support

yourself on it, you would have done nothing.

The question is not about how much to raise it or increments, the problem is that the price of a day's labor has fallen below the price of a day's survival.

That is not only bad news for poor people, it is bad news for you. It is bad news for Mr. Edwards.

For a capitalist society, it is the equivalent of a nuclear bomb.

[AP]

42. So let's not do anything? Let's let rich corporations keep that money and

pay it out in dividends to insiders instead?

We KNOW wages of workers have not kept pace with wages of chief executives, and this is a great way to reverse that trend. And you're against it?

[DuctapeFatwa]

44. I'm not talking about politics or your admiration for Mr Edwards

I'm talking about common sense.

If you come to the emergency room with a sucking chest wound, if I am not going to provide treatment that will save your life, whether I talk about it, or drop a bandaid in the wound as I walk by does not really matter.

If you don't get emergency treatment you will die.

Even if you like me a lot, even if I am a nice person.

There are times and situations where a gesture is appreciated, and there are times where it doesn't matter a hill of beans.

[bigtree]

36. This is a good focus for his campaign

``We are in this to win. We hope for a good debate tomorrow.''

Me too.

[andym]

38. His plan is not comprehensive

His plan is not comprehensive, at best it will "ease the pain" a little.
What are his long term followups? I assume he would answer using his education policies. Anthing else?

[HFishbine]

43. Good to see Edwards change his position on minimum wage increase

John Edwards voted no against a minimum wage increase of $1 over three years in his first year in office. I'm glad he's changed his mind.