Showing posts with label poverty and public policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label poverty and public policy. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Saturday, August 25, 2012
Forgetting
I've been known to buy a drunk a drink.
It happened first on the street in New Orleans almost thirty years ago. My now, how time gets away!
The man approached me and said, "I'm not going to lie to you. I need a drink."
Taken back by his total honesty, I congratulated him for his truthfulness and stepped off the street into a bar and bought him a beer. And yes, I was a preacher at the time.
I've always been partial to people who tell me the truth about themselves, no matter where that takes us. So, across the years I've invested time and money in relieving the thirst of more than a few folks who honestly just needed a drink.
Too bad I hadn't discovered earlier the wisdom of Proverbs on this subject. Not that I share this tendency of mine with everyone, at least not until now. But, the wisdom of ancient Israel does help me just here.
When you have time, take a look at Proverbs 31:4-9.
What you'll find is guidance on who should drink and who shouldn't.
To cut to the conclusion: political leaders should avoid alcohol, but the poor should be given a drink from time to time to relieve their misery and help them forget their poverty. I promise that is what the passage says.
You see, rulers, the politicos need clear heads just to remember all the laws they have passed. If they drink, they may forget the good public policy they've crafted while sober. The results of such stupor would not be good for the oppressed and the poor (see verse 5 especially).
Interesting, huh?
The clear implication is that leaders enact laws that protect the weak.
Now there is a novel idea!
In Texas and in Washington far too often our leaders approve legislation designed to crush the poor, or so it seems out here in reality land. Only after passing laws that do nothing to assist the poor and needy do they hit the pubs. Maybe they reverse the order so they won't have to think about what they've actually done!
The poor, on the other hand, should be given "strong drink" (verse 6). This counsel assumes that a drink helps when you are perishing or in distress. If you need insight for interpreting "perishing" or "distress," drive downtown and look around.
Evidently the Jewish wise man who wrote this understood that beer and wine help poor folks forget their poverty and their misery (verse 7).
I guess that's why lots of crushed people with no real options feel the need for a drink. I don't think I'm being unkind when I observe that many religious people don't understand very well the world of the poor.
The wise man of Proverbs wraps up his homily on strong drink with clear, direct words about the work of leaders and, I would assume, people of faith who know the heart of God:
"Speak out for those who cannot speak, for the rights of all the destitute. Speak out, judge righteously, defend the rights of the poor and needy" (31:8-9).
At the risk of really being written off, let me add, I'll drink to that!
[Editor's note: this post first appeared on June 1, 2005.]
Friday, August 10, 2012
People, morals and budgets
It appears we stand at a crossroads moment of decision. Will we appropriate the resources necessary to promote opportunity, education, progress and fairness? Or, will we slash, cut and destroy program after program that moves us forward as a nation and a society?
Budgets reflect choices.
Budgets affect people .
Budgets spotlight what we value.
Budget discussions now underway in Washington and in Austin will have clear outcomes in the inner city communities/neighborhoods of Dallas, Texas. The decisions made over the next year will set the course for entire segments of our population in this city. For this reason, I'm compelled to talk about the current budget battle.
Congressman Raul Ryan (R-WI) put forward a budget that, if adopted, will wipe out much needed resources for Texas and for Dallas. In fact, the Ryan budget proposes cuts to the federal budget three times larger than the automatic cuts already set for January 2013!
Our poorest neighbors will suffer most. Our children will suffer. In fact, we will all be affected in a negative way.
Here's what the Austin-based Center for Public Policy Priorities said about the Ryan plan:
Reducing Federal Deficits Without a Significant Revenue Increase Would Cost Texas Billions
If significant new revenue isn’t included, efforts to reduce federal deficits would almost certainly damage Texas’ economic recovery and future economic growth by drastically cutting federal investments in schools, roads and bridges, safe communities, and disaster relief.
The House-passed budget from Congressman Paul Ryan is an example of the kind of approach Congress would take if it rejects deficit reduction that includes revenues. Under Ryan’s plan, Texas would lose an estimated 22 percent or $2 billion in federal funding for education, clean water, law enforcement, and other state and local services in 2014 alone.
According to a report released yesterday by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a non-partisan policy research organization based in Washington, D.C., Ryan’s plan also would shift other very large costs to states by reducing sharply federal funding for Medicaid (in addition to repealing the health reform law), and likely by cutting deeply funding for highway construction and other transportation projects.
Deficit-reduction shouldn’t come at the expense of Texas’ economic future. If Congress doesn’t take a balanced approach that includes revenues as well as spending cuts it will damage our ability to educate our children, build roads and bridges, and have clean water and safe communities – all key elements of a strong future economy.
Federal funding for states, counties, and cities very likely would be decimated by an unbalanced approach to deficit reduction in the next decade. That’s because there’s broad bipartisan agreement that significant deficit reduction is needed, but federal policy makers also agree in broad terms that deficit-reduction savings from other major parts of the budget – defense, Medicare and Social Security – should be limited during that period. Federal funding for states and local areas would thus be one of the few remaining sources of large potential savings.
These cuts likely would bring federal aid to state and local governments to historic lows. By 2021, under the Ryan budget, federal grant programs for states, counties, and cities likely would be less than half the average of the last 35 years.
These cuts would add to deep cuts Congress already made to state and local aid last year and deep cuts that Texas made in 2011 to education and other state services vital to economic growth. The $5.3 billion cut in state aid for pre-K-12 public schools has already reduced local school district staffing by more than 25,000 jobs, with more cuts expected for the 2012-13 school year. State budget cuts to Medicaid provider rates have endangered health access for low-income Texans, with only 31 percent of Texas physicians now willing to accept all new Medicaid patients, down from 67 percent in 2000.
___________________________________
Budgets affect people.
Severe budget cuts affect the poorest, weakest, most vulnerable people most severely.
Take the time to read the full report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities here.
Our challenge today is not only economic, it's moral and extremely human as well.
Friday, July 27, 2012
Senior Citizens and Food Stamps
The following report appeared in The Houston Chronicle. Critics of the U. S. Department of Agriculture's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) seldom consider the benefit of the program to hungry, low-income persons, as well as to the overall local economy.
More Texas seniors receiving food stamps
But the future for this Houston woman and thousands of other seniors appears to be far from great.
The fastest-growing group of Texans receiving food stamps is the 60-64 age bracket. In the past six years, those residents receiving food assistance - now issued in the form of a benefit debit card - has jumped by 106 percent to 85,000 as of this month, according to the Texas Health and Human Services Commission. The total number of recipients from all age groups has increased 58 percent.
Authorities say seniors now applying for food stamps often complain of losing their retirement nest eggs in the economic downturn and finding their age to be a distinct disadvantage in finding work. Increasing food prices are also a factor.
Lanius, who once earned a comfortable $65,000 a year as an office manager for a small oil company, was used to donating items to charitable organizations like Second Blessing in west Houston.
'Humbling experience'
But now for the first time in her life, she has not only become a beneficiary of others' generosity at Second Blessing, but she was also enrolled in the food stamp program there. "It's a very humbling experience," she said. "I never dreamed I'd be doing this."
After working nearly 18 years for the same company, she was laid off about two years ago when her employer went into receivership after a storm destroyed two oil platforms. She has not been able to land a steady job since then, forcing her to file early for Social Security and spend through her savings.
"I recently applied for a job at a frozen yogurt store. They'll probably look at the old salary listed on my resume and laugh," she said. "Employers look at people like me and think we'll only work a couple years longer which is not true."
She also represents those boomers identified as the "sandwich generation," because they help support their grown children and aging parents. In her case, her daughter lost her job and moved back home with four children.
Betsy Ballard, spokeswoman for the Houston Food Bank that serves southeast Texas, said her agency has not just seen an onslaught of boomer clients hitting area food banks but many of these people are also applying for food stamps.
107 percent increase
In the past eight months, her agency has interviewed 641 people in their 60s who applied for the debit card. This represents a 107 percent increase over the number that had applied during the same period a year earlier.
"We see this as a fairly significant change since the number of total applications we've filled out for all age groups has shrunk by 1,300," she said.
Still, the total number of Texas participants in the food stamp program (now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP) stands at 3.6 million, which dwarfs the 85,000 enrolled in the 60-64 age bracket.
Yet the growth of the senior group has been outstripping all other age groups since 2007, said Stephanie Goodman, Texas Health and Human Service Commission spokeswoman.
In the past, many of the boomer generation shied away from charity, which they saw as a last resort, said Tiffany Wyatt, spokeswoman for the Catholic Charities community center in Richmond.
"But today some can't afford that kind of pride," said Telecia Rittiman, a social worker for Meals on Wheels.
Billie Jean Robinson, a 63-year-old who lives in the Acres Home area, said she started receiving food stamps nine months ago after her husband of 37 years divorced her. She said she was then no longer able to survive on her small disability check. Even with the $80 monthly debit card for food, she still is behind on her rent and received an eviction notice.
But she's not going hungry: "I can eat now without having to ask people for help."
Retirement plans
A recent Associated Press survey found more than half of baby boomers anticipate retiring later than planned because of significant investment losses during the economic collapse. In fact, a fourth of those surveyed said they would never be able to retire.
Those seniors trying to find work say they're also hitting an invisible age barrier.
One 60-year-old food stamp recipient, Rose Drones, of Channelview, who lost her job as a certified nurse assistant after her car broke down, said, "People don't want to take a chance on you when you're older."
She now earns $200 every two weeks as a receptionist assisting visitors at the Denver Harbor community center looking for the same kind of help she needs.
Nationally, the unemployment rate for seniors, ages 60-64, is 6 percent - a percentage point lower than the rate for those ages 25 to 54. But the seniors saw a faster spike as their unemployment rate has zoomed 100 percent higher than it was five years ago.
cindy.horswell@chron.com
renee.lee@chron.com
By Cindy Horswell and Renèe C. Lee
Monday, July 16, 2012
At age 64, Paulette Lanius is a "Golden Boomer" - one of the 76 million American babies born after World War II, a legacy of the legions of men and women described as the Greatest Generation.But the future for this Houston woman and thousands of other seniors appears to be far from great.
The fastest-growing group of Texans receiving food stamps is the 60-64 age bracket. In the past six years, those residents receiving food assistance - now issued in the form of a benefit debit card - has jumped by 106 percent to 85,000 as of this month, according to the Texas Health and Human Services Commission. The total number of recipients from all age groups has increased 58 percent.
Authorities say seniors now applying for food stamps often complain of losing their retirement nest eggs in the economic downturn and finding their age to be a distinct disadvantage in finding work. Increasing food prices are also a factor.
Lanius, who once earned a comfortable $65,000 a year as an office manager for a small oil company, was used to donating items to charitable organizations like Second Blessing in west Houston.
'Humbling experience'
But now for the first time in her life, she has not only become a beneficiary of others' generosity at Second Blessing, but she was also enrolled in the food stamp program there. "It's a very humbling experience," she said. "I never dreamed I'd be doing this."
After working nearly 18 years for the same company, she was laid off about two years ago when her employer went into receivership after a storm destroyed two oil platforms. She has not been able to land a steady job since then, forcing her to file early for Social Security and spend through her savings.
"I recently applied for a job at a frozen yogurt store. They'll probably look at the old salary listed on my resume and laugh," she said. "Employers look at people like me and think we'll only work a couple years longer which is not true."
She also represents those boomers identified as the "sandwich generation," because they help support their grown children and aging parents. In her case, her daughter lost her job and moved back home with four children.
Betsy Ballard, spokeswoman for the Houston Food Bank that serves southeast Texas, said her agency has not just seen an onslaught of boomer clients hitting area food banks but many of these people are also applying for food stamps.
107 percent increase
In the past eight months, her agency has interviewed 641 people in their 60s who applied for the debit card. This represents a 107 percent increase over the number that had applied during the same period a year earlier.
"We see this as a fairly significant change since the number of total applications we've filled out for all age groups has shrunk by 1,300," she said.
Still, the total number of Texas participants in the food stamp program (now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP) stands at 3.6 million, which dwarfs the 85,000 enrolled in the 60-64 age bracket.
Yet the growth of the senior group has been outstripping all other age groups since 2007, said Stephanie Goodman, Texas Health and Human Service Commission spokeswoman.
In the past, many of the boomer generation shied away from charity, which they saw as a last resort, said Tiffany Wyatt, spokeswoman for the Catholic Charities community center in Richmond.
"But today some can't afford that kind of pride," said Telecia Rittiman, a social worker for Meals on Wheels.
Billie Jean Robinson, a 63-year-old who lives in the Acres Home area, said she started receiving food stamps nine months ago after her husband of 37 years divorced her. She said she was then no longer able to survive on her small disability check. Even with the $80 monthly debit card for food, she still is behind on her rent and received an eviction notice.
But she's not going hungry: "I can eat now without having to ask people for help."
Retirement plans
A recent Associated Press survey found more than half of baby boomers anticipate retiring later than planned because of significant investment losses during the economic collapse. In fact, a fourth of those surveyed said they would never be able to retire.
Those seniors trying to find work say they're also hitting an invisible age barrier.
One 60-year-old food stamp recipient, Rose Drones, of Channelview, who lost her job as a certified nurse assistant after her car broke down, said, "People don't want to take a chance on you when you're older."
She now earns $200 every two weeks as a receptionist assisting visitors at the Denver Harbor community center looking for the same kind of help she needs.
Nationally, the unemployment rate for seniors, ages 60-64, is 6 percent - a percentage point lower than the rate for those ages 25 to 54. But the seniors saw a faster spike as their unemployment rate has zoomed 100 percent higher than it was five years ago.
cindy.horswell@chron.com
renee.lee@chron.com
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
CitySquare and the Corporation for National and Community Service
CitySquare, AmeriCorps Provide A Second Chance
By Kate Enos
Corporation for National and Community Service CEO Robert Velasco, II, visited CitySquare last month to highlight the work being done to strengthen communities in the Dallas/Ft.Worth metro area. Below is a story that highlights the opportunities that national service can provide.
Many Americans struggle with poverty issues. According to the Census Bureau, 1 out of 6 Americans are living in poverty. In the Dallas-Fort Worth Metro Area, more than 14.6% of individuals live below the poverty line and statewide, 4.6 million Texans live in poverty, putting Texas 3% higher than the national average.
In the face of unemployment and poverty, one Dallas resident found a pathway to opportunity through AmeriCorps in his search for food and shelter.
Employed his entire life, a three year stretch without a job left Chris Oliver evicted from his apartment with no food or shelter. Oliver turned to CitySquare, a local nonprofit that provides vital services to neighbors in search of food and housing. It was there he discovered AmeriCorps.
“Before leaving, I filled an application out to become an AmeriCorps member and was accepted that day,” said Oliver. He started work the next day, helping those who were in his shoes one the day before.
At CitySquare, there are currently more than 70 AmeriCorps members who work every day to help feed the hungry and tutor at-risk youth. Since 2006, CitySquare has placed and managed more than 1,000 AmeriCorps members. Over a five-year period, AmeriCorps members and CitySquare have partnered with 39 community agencies in afterschool and summer programming and served more than 14,000 youth throughout Dallas and San Antonio.
As the issues of hunger and poverty affect more Americans each day, the number of Dallas residents who have turned to City Square has steadily increased. In 2011, AmeriCorps members with CitySquare's Hunger Programs have fed more than 18,500 neighbors and are on track to surpass last year's totals.
“The food pantry has seen longer lines of people waiting for food assistance and more neighbors repeatedly having to turn to the pantry for help,” said Amanda O'Neill of CitySquare.
In 2010, more than 2.4 million pounds of food, valued at $2 million, were distributed to more than 27,000 people, or about 12,000 families going through a financial crisis. AmeriCorps members have also helped implement the Nurture Knowledge and Nutrition Feeding Programs, serving more than nutritious meals and snacks to at-risk children in day cares, after-school and summer programs.
As for Chris Oliver, AmeriCorps and CitySquare did more than just help him put food on the table – they've both provided him with a second chance to start his life over. After two years of service with AmeriCorps at CitySquare, Oliver was hired for a full-time position with the organization to work in the homeless outreach program.
“I was on the verge of homelessness and this one visit changed my life forever. I am now gainfully employed with a steady income with food in the cupboard, back in school, and out of a bad neighborhood. AmeriCorps and CitySquare have truly changed my life in ways I could have not imagined.”
[LJ's note: The work of the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) is vital to the future of this nation. Write your congressional representative and your senators today in support of AmeriCorps and the work of the CNCS!]
Friday, September 30, 2011
Junior League and poverty
The Junior League of Dallas has been a partner of ours for many years. Recently, the organization has stepped up to the pressing challenges created by poverty. The League's new focus on strategic impact encourages us. The video here is the result of the group's latest research efforts.
Junior League of Dallas - Poverty from Elixir Entertainment on Vimeo.
Junior League of Dallas - Poverty from Elixir Entertainment on Vimeo.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Payday lenders strike back
The following news story in the aftermath of CitySquare's success in advocating for substantive changes in city ordinances regulating payday lending among poor, laboring communities.
The fight has just begun, or so it would appear!
Lawsuit Filed Over Dallas Payday, Title Loan Rules
By Ken Kalthoff
Friday, Jul 15, 2011
A trade group representing payday and car title loan stores filed a lawsuit Friday to block regulations approved by the city of Dallas in June.
The Consumer Service Alliance of Texas claims the city rules violate state law and improperly restrict loan choices that should remain available to customers.
"We have no other option but to sue the city of Dallas to protect the interests of North Texas consumers who are best served when they are given a variety of realistic credit options and trusted to make financial decisions based on what's best for them and their families," CSAT President Alex Vaughn said in a press release.
The Dallas City Council approved the rules June 22 after the Texas Legislature decided against statewide restrictions on the high interest and fees the stores charge. "They chose to take a very limited action, and we chose to do the most we can at our city level," Councilman Jerry Allen said when the city rules were
approved.
Allen, a former banker, testified in favor of stronger payday loan regulations at hearings on the proposed state law in Austin this year. When drafting the Dallas ordinance, city lawyers decided restrictions on the
amount of interest rates and fees could only be determined by the state.
But Dallas did require lenders to set up payment plans that actually reduce the principal amount of the loan and not just roll over fees.
And the city rules also require registration and record-keeping on borrowers and lenders, which is similar to rules state lawmakers chose to impose statewide.
"This new, egregious Dallas ordinance conflicts with current law because it duplicates financial data collection requirements, limits access to credit for Dallas customers and restricts the terms under which loans may be
repaid," Vaughn said.
City officials could not be reached for comment late Friday, but Allen said in June that he expected a legal challenge and that the city's measure would survive.
"This is as strong a teeth that we can put into this, and it sends a message that we will not tolerate our citizens being taken advantage of," he said.
The fight has just begun, or so it would appear!
Lawsuit Filed Over Dallas Payday, Title Loan Rules
By Ken Kalthoff
Friday, Jul 15, 2011
A trade group representing payday and car title loan stores filed a lawsuit Friday to block regulations approved by the city of Dallas in June.
The Consumer Service Alliance of Texas claims the city rules violate state law and improperly restrict loan choices that should remain available to customers.
"We have no other option but to sue the city of Dallas to protect the interests of North Texas consumers who are best served when they are given a variety of realistic credit options and trusted to make financial decisions based on what's best for them and their families," CSAT President Alex Vaughn said in a press release.
The Dallas City Council approved the rules June 22 after the Texas Legislature decided against statewide restrictions on the high interest and fees the stores charge. "They chose to take a very limited action, and we chose to do the most we can at our city level," Councilman Jerry Allen said when the city rules were
approved.
Allen, a former banker, testified in favor of stronger payday loan regulations at hearings on the proposed state law in Austin this year. When drafting the Dallas ordinance, city lawyers decided restrictions on the
amount of interest rates and fees could only be determined by the state.
But Dallas did require lenders to set up payment plans that actually reduce the principal amount of the loan and not just roll over fees.
And the city rules also require registration and record-keeping on borrowers and lenders, which is similar to rules state lawmakers chose to impose statewide.
"This new, egregious Dallas ordinance conflicts with current law because it duplicates financial data collection requirements, limits access to credit for Dallas customers and restricts the terms under which loans may be
repaid," Vaughn said.
City officials could not be reached for comment late Friday, but Allen said in June that he expected a legal challenge and that the city's measure would survive.
"This is as strong a teeth that we can put into this, and it sends a message that we will not tolerate our citizens being taken advantage of," he said.
Friday, June 24, 2011
Tough news from The Nonprofit Quarterly:
The Other America’s Philanthropy: What Giving USA Numbers Reveal in 2011
June 20, 2011
Ruth McCambridge and Rick Cohen
As some readers will recall, “The Other America” was a study published in 1962 that was influential in informing social policy. It documented the extent of poverty in the United States – asserting that much of poverty was unacknowledged. Fast forward to 2011. Has a good part of philanthropy forgotten about poverty in this country right in the midst of the worst recession since the depression?
Last week the United Way of the Central Carolinas announced that it had withdrawn $2.5 million out of its $10 million in reserves to try to level fund community agencies struggling with increased need and reduced government contracts. Its fundraising had fallen $5 million short from the previous year.
Yet here comes the headline from this year’s Giving USA report on charitable giving: giving was up by 2.1 percent in 2010 over the previous year, indicating a rebound of charitable giving. We can either think of that United Way as a low performing anomaly or look deeper to understand why so many community organizations are still struggling.
Among fundraisers, there’s an ethic of not crying wolf, of seeing the positive even in the negatives, and assuming that the unending generosity of the American charitable donor will win out. But below the headline, the Giving USA numbers this year present an alarming picture for communities across the United States on any number of counts.
What we see in the Giving USA numbers is a still-depressed domestic giving scene. The 2.1 percent increase logged for 2010 estimated giving is an increase based on numbers for the previous two years that have been adjusted down. The adjusted cumulative decline in Giving for 2008 and 2009 was 13 percent so the 2.1 percent estimated increase brings giving to an 11 percent decline from pre-recession highs.
This decline, as we suggested last year, has not been evenly distributed. What is most obvious in this year’s numbers is a significant disinvestment in people in need on the domestic front. As we understand the numbers, the subsector that took the biggest hit in terms of decreased dollars was human services at a 5.6 percent decline in inflation adjusted numbers last year alone. While at first glance, the category appears to have remained stable, Patrick Rooney, of the Center on Philanthropy where the Giving USA number are crunched, says that 75 percent of the relief giving from this country to Haiti last year went as grants and contributions to domestic human service agencies. Backing that amount out results in the 5.6 percent drop.
The giving that is documented is increasingly not in the form of immediately spendable dollars. It includes gifts to foundations that keep increasing even while foundation grantmaking remains distinctly pallid. Additionally, grantmaking from corporations, reported to be skyrocketing here, is increasingly in the form of in-kind products, particularly from pharmaceutical companies. Some link this largess to attempts to get rid of excess inventory but major corporate cash givers to human services such as the financial sector and retail have been declining.
What the Giving USA numbers suggest is not only a crisis of declining charitable giving reaching human services or social safety net groups, but a class divide where the groups that do well in charitable solicitations are those with connections, with the social class interrelationships that give them automatic access. Meanwhile, charitable giving for human services is very much the province of the less moneyed donors, the payroll deduction donors, the people who volunteer at the shelter or food pantry or clinic because they know the tangible importance of those institutions to their communities.
NPQ believes that there is a class divide in our society, and it is reflected in a class divide in charitable giving and in the nonprofit sector. Just as corporate CEO compensation is now back at pre-recession levels even while joblessness persists, the needs of the poor and of the organizations that serve the poor have virtually disappeared from political discourse and from the priority lists of philanthropy. And the incentives -- bequests, IRA rollovers, etc. -- flow toward the institutions with the fundraising infrastructures and the social connections to major donors.
Is it time to rethink the incentives built into our charitable giving structure, where a donation to a sector or institution serving primarily the affluent, is treated identically to a donation meeting the safety net needs of the poor? If we do not rethink the current structures, the creeping and deepening class divide in our society and in the nonprofit sector will only persist.
To read the entire important report click here.
The Other America’s Philanthropy: What Giving USA Numbers Reveal in 2011
June 20, 2011
Ruth McCambridge and Rick Cohen
As some readers will recall, “The Other America” was a study published in 1962 that was influential in informing social policy. It documented the extent of poverty in the United States – asserting that much of poverty was unacknowledged. Fast forward to 2011. Has a good part of philanthropy forgotten about poverty in this country right in the midst of the worst recession since the depression?
Last week the United Way of the Central Carolinas announced that it had withdrawn $2.5 million out of its $10 million in reserves to try to level fund community agencies struggling with increased need and reduced government contracts. Its fundraising had fallen $5 million short from the previous year.
Yet here comes the headline from this year’s Giving USA report on charitable giving: giving was up by 2.1 percent in 2010 over the previous year, indicating a rebound of charitable giving. We can either think of that United Way as a low performing anomaly or look deeper to understand why so many community organizations are still struggling.
Among fundraisers, there’s an ethic of not crying wolf, of seeing the positive even in the negatives, and assuming that the unending generosity of the American charitable donor will win out. But below the headline, the Giving USA numbers this year present an alarming picture for communities across the United States on any number of counts.
What we see in the Giving USA numbers is a still-depressed domestic giving scene. The 2.1 percent increase logged for 2010 estimated giving is an increase based on numbers for the previous two years that have been adjusted down. The adjusted cumulative decline in Giving for 2008 and 2009 was 13 percent so the 2.1 percent estimated increase brings giving to an 11 percent decline from pre-recession highs.
This decline, as we suggested last year, has not been evenly distributed. What is most obvious in this year’s numbers is a significant disinvestment in people in need on the domestic front. As we understand the numbers, the subsector that took the biggest hit in terms of decreased dollars was human services at a 5.6 percent decline in inflation adjusted numbers last year alone. While at first glance, the category appears to have remained stable, Patrick Rooney, of the Center on Philanthropy where the Giving USA number are crunched, says that 75 percent of the relief giving from this country to Haiti last year went as grants and contributions to domestic human service agencies. Backing that amount out results in the 5.6 percent drop.
The giving that is documented is increasingly not in the form of immediately spendable dollars. It includes gifts to foundations that keep increasing even while foundation grantmaking remains distinctly pallid. Additionally, grantmaking from corporations, reported to be skyrocketing here, is increasingly in the form of in-kind products, particularly from pharmaceutical companies. Some link this largess to attempts to get rid of excess inventory but major corporate cash givers to human services such as the financial sector and retail have been declining.
What the Giving USA numbers suggest is not only a crisis of declining charitable giving reaching human services or social safety net groups, but a class divide where the groups that do well in charitable solicitations are those with connections, with the social class interrelationships that give them automatic access. Meanwhile, charitable giving for human services is very much the province of the less moneyed donors, the payroll deduction donors, the people who volunteer at the shelter or food pantry or clinic because they know the tangible importance of those institutions to their communities.
NPQ believes that there is a class divide in our society, and it is reflected in a class divide in charitable giving and in the nonprofit sector. Just as corporate CEO compensation is now back at pre-recession levels even while joblessness persists, the needs of the poor and of the organizations that serve the poor have virtually disappeared from political discourse and from the priority lists of philanthropy. And the incentives -- bequests, IRA rollovers, etc. -- flow toward the institutions with the fundraising infrastructures and the social connections to major donors.
Is it time to rethink the incentives built into our charitable giving structure, where a donation to a sector or institution serving primarily the affluent, is treated identically to a donation meeting the safety net needs of the poor? If we do not rethink the current structures, the creeping and deepening class divide in our society and in the nonprofit sector will only persist.
To read the entire important report click here.
Friday, March 18, 2011
Budgets as moral documnets
I picked this report up from the United Methodist News Service last week. Worth considering. Where does faith and its values fit in the process of prioritizing funding decisions?
Budget’s ‘moral’ impact
Faith leaders condemn ‘draconian cuts’
By Linda Bloom
Faith leaders are expressing concern over proposed U.S. federal budget changes that could slash aid to the poor. Cuts passed by the U.S. House of Representatives would reduce international food-aid programs by up to 50%.
UMNS — The poor have no one staging mass protests on their behalf, but religious leaders are speaking out about how proposed changes to the U.S. budget for 2011 and 2012 could affect them.
“The message is consistent year in and year out: We want to make sure we’re protecting those living in poverty or on the economic margins both in the U.S and around the world,” explained John Hill, director of Economic & Environmental Justice at the United Methodist General Board of Church & Society.
In a March 1 letter to Congress, 16 religious leaders — including Bishop Larry Goodpaster, president of the United Methodist Council of Bishops, and the Rev. John McCullough, a United Methodist who is executive director of Church World Service — expressed their full commitment to ministry with the poor.
“None of us can prosper and be secure while some of us live in misery and desperation,” the letter said. “In an interdependent world, the security and prosperity of any nation is inseparable from that of even the most vulnerable both within and beyond their borders.”
Last month, President Barack Obama released his budget proposal for 2012, and the U.S. House of Representatives passed a $61 billion budget-cut package for the rest of the 2011 fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. The U.S. Senate has yet to agree on the House cuts. The president signed a budget extension bill March 2 that will keep federal agencies open through March 18 and enact $4 billion in new spending cuts.
Draconian cuts
Politicians on both sides of the aisle are proposing draconian cuts that will greatly compromise “our capacity as a nation to respond to situations of need,” McCullough said. “The budget reduction essentially reduces what we would call the safety net for poor people and for vulnerable communities here in the United States.”
Faith leaders understand the concerns over the nation’s financial deficits. Drastically reducing discretionary programs for the poor that constitute an extremely small part of the budget is not a solution to the economic crisis, they pointed out in the letter to Congress.
“These cuts will devastate those living in poverty, at home and around the world, cost jobs, and in the long run, will harm, not help, our fiscal situation,” the letter said. “While ‘shared sacrifice’ can be an appropriate banner, those who would be devastated by these cuts have nothing left to sacrifice.”
The sacrifice is global, not just local, said Thomas Kemper, top executive of the United Methodist General Board of Global Ministries. And while only a fraction, 0.5% of the budget, relates to international aid, “for the people who are affected by these cuts, it makes a lot of difference,” according to Kemper.
Budget decisions have ethical as well as financial implications, say Christian leaders organized by Jim Wallis and Sojourners, a faith-based social justice organization. Those leaders took out a full-page ad in the Feb. 28 edition of Politico, a newspaper devoted to politics.
’What would Jesus Cut?’
Titled “What would Jesus Cut?,” the ad declared, “A budget is a moral document.” It called on legislators to defend international aid for pandemic diseases, critical child-health and family-nutrition programs, “proven” work and income supports for poverty-level families and educational support, particularly in low-income communities.
Sojourners, a faith-based social justice organization, took out a full-page ad with a simple question in the Feb. 28 issue of Politico, a publication devoted to politics.
“Our faith tells us that the moral test of a society is how it treats the poor,” the ad said. “As a country, we face difficult choices, but whether or not we defend vulnerable people should not be one of them.”
Engaging in ministry with the poor is a mission priority for The United Methodist Church, and its 13 agencies and commissions have adopted “guiding principles and foundations” for that work.
Social holiness
“It’s fundamental to our faith that we care for the poor and vulnerable,” said the Rev. Larry Hollon, top executive of United Methodist Communications. He pointed out that in the Wesleyan tradition holiness does not exist without social holiness. “We are a faith community who believes faith should not only promote our personal growth, it should also equip and mobilize us for mission and service to the world,” he said.
It’s about personally being involved and being with the poor.
The understanding of that ministry goes beyond charity, according to Kemper. “It’s not only about giving money. It’s not only about doing a soup kitchen. It’s about personally being involved and being with the poor,” he emphasized.
Advocacy actions over federal budget matters since January have included a call by faith leaders to Obama to renew his campaign pledge to “cut poverty in half” in the next 10 years and a Valentine’s Day lobbying effort to “show love” and make the poor a priority.
Alternative solutions
After the House bill passed, Hill said National Council of Churches leaders drafted the March 1 letter that reflected deep concern that these cuts are particularly affecting faith-based anti-poverty ministries, both in the U.S. and around the world.
Alternative solutions exist, Hill asserted. At times of fiscal crisis in the 1990s, he pointed out that Congress was able to make reductions while still protecting those in poverty. “As a result, even though there were very large cuts, poverty rates were down,” he said. “We’re basically asking them to do that again.”
The House bill cuts in the 2011 budget also would greatly affect international assistance, according to the Washington Post. It slashes international food-aid programs by up to 50% and State Dept. funding for refugees by more than 40%.
The International Disaster Assistance Fund would be reduced by 67%. McCullough questioned this cut because it is obvious, judging from the outpouring of support by Americans to help victims of disasters like the Asian tsunami and Haiti earthquake, “people expect the United States is going to be in a position to respond to these types of disasters.”
Makes no sense
Humanitarian agencies like Church World Service already are aware, McCullough said, that when resources for aid and development work are severely curtailed “the potential for [human] survival diminishes dramatically.”
It also makes no sense to cut aid that helps avoid military conflicts and fights terrorism, said Kemper. He used as an example the new nation of South Sudan emerging after years of civil war. “If you take away funding and aid from these countries, they get more fragile,” he said.
Because of the denomination’s pledge to help eradicate malaria, United Methodist leaders are particularly concerned about the House bill’s decrease in the U.S. contribution to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Malaria & Tuberculosis by 40%. Kemper called it “a blow” to church members trying so hard to raise $75 million themselves through the Imagine No Malaria initiative.
Some of the “unacceptable” consequences of that budget reduction were pointed out by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when she spoke to the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Those consequences include the denial of treatment and prevention measures for malaria to 5 million children and family members; denial of treatment for tropical diseases to some 16 million people and a loss of millions of available polio and measles vaccines.
“It means children will die, more people will get sick, and preventable diseases will not be prevented,” said Hollon, whose agency coordinates Imagine No Malaria.
Editor’s note: Linda Bloom is a United Methodist News Service reporter based in New York.
Budget’s ‘moral’ impact
Faith leaders condemn ‘draconian cuts’
By Linda Bloom
Faith leaders are expressing concern over proposed U.S. federal budget changes that could slash aid to the poor. Cuts passed by the U.S. House of Representatives would reduce international food-aid programs by up to 50%.
UMNS — The poor have no one staging mass protests on their behalf, but religious leaders are speaking out about how proposed changes to the U.S. budget for 2011 and 2012 could affect them.
“The message is consistent year in and year out: We want to make sure we’re protecting those living in poverty or on the economic margins both in the U.S and around the world,” explained John Hill, director of Economic & Environmental Justice at the United Methodist General Board of Church & Society.
In a March 1 letter to Congress, 16 religious leaders — including Bishop Larry Goodpaster, president of the United Methodist Council of Bishops, and the Rev. John McCullough, a United Methodist who is executive director of Church World Service — expressed their full commitment to ministry with the poor.
“None of us can prosper and be secure while some of us live in misery and desperation,” the letter said. “In an interdependent world, the security and prosperity of any nation is inseparable from that of even the most vulnerable both within and beyond their borders.”
Last month, President Barack Obama released his budget proposal for 2012, and the U.S. House of Representatives passed a $61 billion budget-cut package for the rest of the 2011 fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. The U.S. Senate has yet to agree on the House cuts. The president signed a budget extension bill March 2 that will keep federal agencies open through March 18 and enact $4 billion in new spending cuts.
Draconian cuts
Politicians on both sides of the aisle are proposing draconian cuts that will greatly compromise “our capacity as a nation to respond to situations of need,” McCullough said. “The budget reduction essentially reduces what we would call the safety net for poor people and for vulnerable communities here in the United States.”
Faith leaders understand the concerns over the nation’s financial deficits. Drastically reducing discretionary programs for the poor that constitute an extremely small part of the budget is not a solution to the economic crisis, they pointed out in the letter to Congress.
“These cuts will devastate those living in poverty, at home and around the world, cost jobs, and in the long run, will harm, not help, our fiscal situation,” the letter said. “While ‘shared sacrifice’ can be an appropriate banner, those who would be devastated by these cuts have nothing left to sacrifice.”
The sacrifice is global, not just local, said Thomas Kemper, top executive of the United Methodist General Board of Global Ministries. And while only a fraction, 0.5% of the budget, relates to international aid, “for the people who are affected by these cuts, it makes a lot of difference,” according to Kemper.
Budget decisions have ethical as well as financial implications, say Christian leaders organized by Jim Wallis and Sojourners, a faith-based social justice organization. Those leaders took out a full-page ad in the Feb. 28 edition of Politico, a newspaper devoted to politics.
’What would Jesus Cut?’
Titled “What would Jesus Cut?,” the ad declared, “A budget is a moral document.” It called on legislators to defend international aid for pandemic diseases, critical child-health and family-nutrition programs, “proven” work and income supports for poverty-level families and educational support, particularly in low-income communities.
Sojourners, a faith-based social justice organization, took out a full-page ad with a simple question in the Feb. 28 issue of Politico, a publication devoted to politics.
“Our faith tells us that the moral test of a society is how it treats the poor,” the ad said. “As a country, we face difficult choices, but whether or not we defend vulnerable people should not be one of them.”
Engaging in ministry with the poor is a mission priority for The United Methodist Church, and its 13 agencies and commissions have adopted “guiding principles and foundations” for that work.
Social holiness
“It’s fundamental to our faith that we care for the poor and vulnerable,” said the Rev. Larry Hollon, top executive of United Methodist Communications. He pointed out that in the Wesleyan tradition holiness does not exist without social holiness. “We are a faith community who believes faith should not only promote our personal growth, it should also equip and mobilize us for mission and service to the world,” he said.
It’s about personally being involved and being with the poor.
The understanding of that ministry goes beyond charity, according to Kemper. “It’s not only about giving money. It’s not only about doing a soup kitchen. It’s about personally being involved and being with the poor,” he emphasized.
Advocacy actions over federal budget matters since January have included a call by faith leaders to Obama to renew his campaign pledge to “cut poverty in half” in the next 10 years and a Valentine’s Day lobbying effort to “show love” and make the poor a priority.
Alternative solutions
After the House bill passed, Hill said National Council of Churches leaders drafted the March 1 letter that reflected deep concern that these cuts are particularly affecting faith-based anti-poverty ministries, both in the U.S. and around the world.
Alternative solutions exist, Hill asserted. At times of fiscal crisis in the 1990s, he pointed out that Congress was able to make reductions while still protecting those in poverty. “As a result, even though there were very large cuts, poverty rates were down,” he said. “We’re basically asking them to do that again.”
The House bill cuts in the 2011 budget also would greatly affect international assistance, according to the Washington Post. It slashes international food-aid programs by up to 50% and State Dept. funding for refugees by more than 40%.
The International Disaster Assistance Fund would be reduced by 67%. McCullough questioned this cut because it is obvious, judging from the outpouring of support by Americans to help victims of disasters like the Asian tsunami and Haiti earthquake, “people expect the United States is going to be in a position to respond to these types of disasters.”
Makes no sense
Humanitarian agencies like Church World Service already are aware, McCullough said, that when resources for aid and development work are severely curtailed “the potential for [human] survival diminishes dramatically.”
It also makes no sense to cut aid that helps avoid military conflicts and fights terrorism, said Kemper. He used as an example the new nation of South Sudan emerging after years of civil war. “If you take away funding and aid from these countries, they get more fragile,” he said.
Because of the denomination’s pledge to help eradicate malaria, United Methodist leaders are particularly concerned about the House bill’s decrease in the U.S. contribution to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Malaria & Tuberculosis by 40%. Kemper called it “a blow” to church members trying so hard to raise $75 million themselves through the Imagine No Malaria initiative.
Some of the “unacceptable” consequences of that budget reduction were pointed out by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when she spoke to the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Those consequences include the denial of treatment and prevention measures for malaria to 5 million children and family members; denial of treatment for tropical diseases to some 16 million people and a loss of millions of available polio and measles vaccines.
“It means children will die, more people will get sick, and preventable diseases will not be prevented,” said Hollon, whose agency coordinates Imagine No Malaria.
Editor’s note: Linda Bloom is a United Methodist News Service reporter based in New York.
Friday, March 11, 2011
Budget cuts and low-income backs
State, local lobbyists push to save programs from budget ax
By Kevin Bogardus and Keith Laing - 03/08/11 06:35 AM ET
State and local government officials are flooding Washington to lobby against spending cuts that they say fall disproportionately on domestic programs.
In interviews with The Hill, lobbyists for state and local governments said they understand that the ballooning federal deficit is likely to reduce federal support for roadwork, law enforcement and affordable housing.
But they argue that the sacrifice needed to reduce the deficit should be shared across the board — including by Medicaid, Medicare and defense programs — and not just fall on domestic programs.
“You can’t really solve the deficit by just cutting discretionary, non-military spending. It is such a small part of the budget,” Larry Naake, executive director of the National Association of Counties (NACo), told The Hill. “You end up destroying programs that help a lot of people at the local level.”
The county officials’ group is meeting in Washington this week for its annual legislative conference. Close to 1,600 NACo members will be in town, and many are expected to lobby their home-state delegations about the budget cuts.
The group is concerned about the funding cuts in President Obama’s 2012 budget request and objects to the cuts passed by the House in February for the remainder of fiscal 2011.
Nevertheless, Naake said NACo could support freezing domestic spending at fiscal 2010 levels.
“Once the [continuing resolution] is finished, we will have to start on the proposed budget next year. But it’s not as drastic as anything the House is proposing,” Naake said. “Share the pain across the board, not just with domestic programs.”
One of the biggest priorities of county officials will be protecting funding for Community Development Block Grants (CDBGs). NACo members are being encouraged to wear “Save CDBG” buttons on their suit lapels as they make the rounds on Capitol Hill.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development runs the grant program, which helps local government officials fund affordable housing and anti-poverty programs as well as infrastructure development.
Under the House Republican continuing resolution, the grant program would be reduced from about $4 billion to $1.5 billion. Other programs that face funding reductions under the legislation are the federal transit program, which would go from $10.7 billion to $10.2 billion; the high-speed rail initiative, which would see its current $3.7 billion in funding wiped out; and community health center grants, which would be reduced by $1 billion.
Naake said the budget cuts would only lead to more unemployment during the tough economic times.
To read entire report click here.
By Kevin Bogardus and Keith Laing - 03/08/11 06:35 AM ET
State and local government officials are flooding Washington to lobby against spending cuts that they say fall disproportionately on domestic programs.
In interviews with The Hill, lobbyists for state and local governments said they understand that the ballooning federal deficit is likely to reduce federal support for roadwork, law enforcement and affordable housing.
But they argue that the sacrifice needed to reduce the deficit should be shared across the board — including by Medicaid, Medicare and defense programs — and not just fall on domestic programs.
“You can’t really solve the deficit by just cutting discretionary, non-military spending. It is such a small part of the budget,” Larry Naake, executive director of the National Association of Counties (NACo), told The Hill. “You end up destroying programs that help a lot of people at the local level.”
The county officials’ group is meeting in Washington this week for its annual legislative conference. Close to 1,600 NACo members will be in town, and many are expected to lobby their home-state delegations about the budget cuts.
The group is concerned about the funding cuts in President Obama’s 2012 budget request and objects to the cuts passed by the House in February for the remainder of fiscal 2011.
Nevertheless, Naake said NACo could support freezing domestic spending at fiscal 2010 levels.
“Once the [continuing resolution] is finished, we will have to start on the proposed budget next year. But it’s not as drastic as anything the House is proposing,” Naake said. “Share the pain across the board, not just with domestic programs.”
One of the biggest priorities of county officials will be protecting funding for Community Development Block Grants (CDBGs). NACo members are being encouraged to wear “Save CDBG” buttons on their suit lapels as they make the rounds on Capitol Hill.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development runs the grant program, which helps local government officials fund affordable housing and anti-poverty programs as well as infrastructure development.
Under the House Republican continuing resolution, the grant program would be reduced from about $4 billion to $1.5 billion. Other programs that face funding reductions under the legislation are the federal transit program, which would go from $10.7 billion to $10.2 billion; the high-speed rail initiative, which would see its current $3.7 billion in funding wiped out; and community health center grants, which would be reduced by $1 billion.
Naake said the budget cuts would only lead to more unemployment during the tough economic times.
To read entire report click here.
Monday, November 29, 2010
Children rally for fairness. . .by faith
Recently, I received a copy of the "lobbying" plan developed by a group of 6th grade Sunday School members who live in St. Louis, Missouri. I've reproduced their simple booklet that they created for a trip to their state capitol. They met with representatives to argue for a new state policy that would create an earned income tax provision for working people in their state.
I find the media that they developed for their trip to be most effective.
Even more impressive is the fact that their teachers and their congregation clearly established a link between faith and fairness in public policy.
Seen anything like this coming out of your Sunday School lately?
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Friday, April 16, 2010
Families thankful for school lunches. . .
The U. S. Department of Agriculture's free and reduced lunch program is growing. The Huffington Post picked up the following report from the Associated Press.
We know this program well here in Dallas, Texas.
What many people are surprised to learn is that over 85% of Dallas Independent School District students are eligible for free meals at school every day. Read the report and let me know what you think.
Struggling families depend more on school lunches
HEATHER HOLLINGSWORTH
March 27, 2010 09:32 PM EST
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — For a couple tight weeks after taking in her sixth-grade stepson, Lisa Lewis fretted about how to pay for his school lunches.
Unable to find a full-time job, the 37-year-old works part-time at a Kansas City, Kan., daycare, earning minimum wage. On that money alone, she supports herself, her unemployed husband, her stepson and her 11th-grade son.
"I sometimes cry myself to sleep wondering how I am going to keep my family fed and things like that," Lewis said. "I'm making it but barely."
Her worries were eased when she found out she could get government assistance to pay for the younger boy's meals. Her older son already is part of the subsidized lunch program.
In the midst of a blistering recession, more families are flocking to the federal program that gives students free or reduced-priced lunches. Schools are watching for who enrolls in the program because it gives teachers insight into life at home and officials consider it a barometer of poverty.
The numbers are telling.
During the 2008-2009 school year, about 19 million students received free and reduced lunches, which is 895,000 more than the previous year – a jump of nearly 5 percent and that greatly outpaced the overall increase in school enrollment, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service. Typically, the increases are about 1 to 2 percent each year.
To read the entire report click here.
We know this program well here in Dallas, Texas.
What many people are surprised to learn is that over 85% of Dallas Independent School District students are eligible for free meals at school every day. Read the report and let me know what you think.
Struggling families depend more on school lunches
HEATHER HOLLINGSWORTH
March 27, 2010 09:32 PM EST
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — For a couple tight weeks after taking in her sixth-grade stepson, Lisa Lewis fretted about how to pay for his school lunches.
Unable to find a full-time job, the 37-year-old works part-time at a Kansas City, Kan., daycare, earning minimum wage. On that money alone, she supports herself, her unemployed husband, her stepson and her 11th-grade son.
"I sometimes cry myself to sleep wondering how I am going to keep my family fed and things like that," Lewis said. "I'm making it but barely."
Her worries were eased when she found out she could get government assistance to pay for the younger boy's meals. Her older son already is part of the subsidized lunch program.
In the midst of a blistering recession, more families are flocking to the federal program that gives students free or reduced-priced lunches. Schools are watching for who enrolls in the program because it gives teachers insight into life at home and officials consider it a barometer of poverty.
The numbers are telling.
During the 2008-2009 school year, about 19 million students received free and reduced lunches, which is 895,000 more than the previous year – a jump of nearly 5 percent and that greatly outpaced the overall increase in school enrollment, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service. Typically, the increases are about 1 to 2 percent each year.
To read the entire report click here.
Tuesday, April 06, 2010
Permanent Supportive Housing for the hardest to house and most expensive to keep on the streets
This morning at beginning at 7:15 a.m. at the Fairmont Hotel, located in Downtown Dallas just a couple of blocks from CityWalk@ Akard, Central Dallas Ministries hosts our 15th Annual Urban Ministries Prayer Breakfast.
Our speaker this year will be Rosanne Haggerty, national expert on housing approaches for the chronically homeless. Following breakfast, Ms. Haggerty will join others for a panel discussion on the subject.
The morning promises to be extremely important as we continue to advance the community conversation about permanent supportive housing as a strategy for ending chronic homelessness in Dallas.
In view of our subject this morning, the report published by Kim Horner last Sunday in The Dallas Morning News is certainly timely.
Horner's report describes one of our next big efforts to provide housing for our poorest neighbors. Here's a taste of the report:
Dallas cottage project aims to benefit both homeless 'frequent fliers,' taxpayers
By KIM HORNER / The Dallas Morning News
Fifty of Dallas' most costly homeless "frequent fliers" – people who repeatedly cycle through institutions such as hospitals and jail at a cost to taxpayers – could soon be finding homes, just south of Deep Ellum.
The Cottages at Hickory Crossing as proposed would include 50 dwellings, each 400 square feet. The residents would be the city's chronically homeless, people who often have disabling mental illnesses and addictions along with criminal histories.
The project aims to stabilize that population – and save taxpayers money.
Studies across the nation have found that each chronically homeless person costs taxpayers between $35,000 and $150,000 a year. Dallas has an estimated 600 to 1,000 chronically homeless people.
"These are the most expensive people on the streets in Dallas," said Larry James, president and chief executive officer of Central Dallas Ministries, which would provide caseworkers to assist the tenants.
The Communities Foundation of Texas and the Meadows Foundation are working with other agencies to raise the $10 million in public and private funds needed to build and operate the housing program over three years.
Residents would be referred by the Dallas County criminal justice system and the Metro Dallas Homeless Alliance, which runs the city's homeless assistance center, The Bridge. The agencies would research jail, mental health and hospital records to determine the homeless people with the highest costs to public systems.
To continue reading, click here.
Our speaker this year will be Rosanne Haggerty, national expert on housing approaches for the chronically homeless. Following breakfast, Ms. Haggerty will join others for a panel discussion on the subject.
The morning promises to be extremely important as we continue to advance the community conversation about permanent supportive housing as a strategy for ending chronic homelessness in Dallas.
In view of our subject this morning, the report published by Kim Horner last Sunday in The Dallas Morning News is certainly timely.
Horner's report describes one of our next big efforts to provide housing for our poorest neighbors. Here's a taste of the report:
Dallas cottage project aims to benefit both homeless 'frequent fliers,' taxpayers
By KIM HORNER / The Dallas Morning News
Fifty of Dallas' most costly homeless "frequent fliers" – people who repeatedly cycle through institutions such as hospitals and jail at a cost to taxpayers – could soon be finding homes, just south of Deep Ellum.
The Cottages at Hickory Crossing as proposed would include 50 dwellings, each 400 square feet. The residents would be the city's chronically homeless, people who often have disabling mental illnesses and addictions along with criminal histories.
The project aims to stabilize that population – and save taxpayers money.
Studies across the nation have found that each chronically homeless person costs taxpayers between $35,000 and $150,000 a year. Dallas has an estimated 600 to 1,000 chronically homeless people.
"These are the most expensive people on the streets in Dallas," said Larry James, president and chief executive officer of Central Dallas Ministries, which would provide caseworkers to assist the tenants.
The Communities Foundation of Texas and the Meadows Foundation are working with other agencies to raise the $10 million in public and private funds needed to build and operate the housing program over three years.
Residents would be referred by the Dallas County criminal justice system and the Metro Dallas Homeless Alliance, which runs the city's homeless assistance center, The Bridge. The agencies would research jail, mental health and hospital records to determine the homeless people with the highest costs to public systems.
To continue reading, click here.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Pew Report: Black children and poverty
What follows was published by the Economic Policy Institute.
Many people who spout off about poverty and how to overcome it have no real understanding of the pervasive and corrosive affect of dense poverty on the lives of children and their families.
Sobering data.
Business as usual charity won't move the needle on this social reality. This issue calls for bold, courageous public policy and consistent leadership to go with it.
October 7, 2009
By Joydeep Roy
Two out of every three black children born between 1985 and 2000 were raised in neighborhoods with at least a 20 percent poverty rate, compared with just 6 percent of white children, a new report from the Pew Foundation finds. These numbers are virtually unchanged from thirty years ago. Among children born between 1955 and 1970, 62 percent of black children were raised in neighborhoods with at least a 20 percent poverty rate, compared with only 4 percent of white children, according to the Pew report. This gap persists even when the poorest families are excluded from the analysis. Among children from the upper three income quintiles, almost half of black children -- 49% -- lived in high-poverty neighborhoods, defined as those with at least a 20% poverty rate. Only one percent of white children from the upper three income quintiles lived in high-poverty neighborhoods.
Too many children, particularly those from minority groups, are growing up in poor communities. While most studies of child poverty look at the direct impact on children living in poverty, research also shows that proximity to poverty can limit a child’s job and education prospects, even if that particular child is not poor. With research showing that reducing the concentration of poverty in their neighborhoods significantly affects children’s future, including their prospects in the labor market and their chances of upward mobility, policies that foster such changes should be a top priority.
Many people who spout off about poverty and how to overcome it have no real understanding of the pervasive and corrosive affect of dense poverty on the lives of children and their families.
Sobering data.
Business as usual charity won't move the needle on this social reality. This issue calls for bold, courageous public policy and consistent leadership to go with it.
Most black children grow up in neighborhoods with significant poverty
October 7, 2009
By Joydeep Roy
Two out of every three black children born between 1985 and 2000 were raised in neighborhoods with at least a 20 percent poverty rate, compared with just 6 percent of white children, a new report from the Pew Foundation finds. These numbers are virtually unchanged from thirty years ago. Among children born between 1955 and 1970, 62 percent of black children were raised in neighborhoods with at least a 20 percent poverty rate, compared with only 4 percent of white children, according to the Pew report. This gap persists even when the poorest families are excluded from the analysis. Among children from the upper three income quintiles, almost half of black children -- 49% -- lived in high-poverty neighborhoods, defined as those with at least a 20% poverty rate. Only one percent of white children from the upper three income quintiles lived in high-poverty neighborhoods.
Too many children, particularly those from minority groups, are growing up in poor communities. While most studies of child poverty look at the direct impact on children living in poverty, research also shows that proximity to poverty can limit a child’s job and education prospects, even if that particular child is not poor. With research showing that reducing the concentration of poverty in their neighborhoods significantly affects children’s future, including their prospects in the labor market and their chances of upward mobility, policies that foster such changes should be a top priority.
Friday, March 12, 2010
Wealth keeps moving upward. . .
The chart above pretty well sums up economic reality in the United States these days. Poverty, personal and family options and equity are all shaped by this report. The chart comes with the following report from the Economic Policy Institute.
Here's what the report reveals:
Where has all the income gone? Look up.
March 3, 2010
By Lawrence Mishel
The 400 American households with the highest incomes also have enjoyed a much faster pace of income growth than the vast majority. And, because tax rates applied to their income have fallen by a third, their after-tax incomes grew substantially faster than their pre-tax incomes. The figure looks at inflation-adjusted pre-tax and after-tax income growth for the 400 top-income families between 1992 and 2007, based on new data recently released by the Internal Revenue Service. It shows that while pre-tax income grew by a staggering 409% over that 15-year period, after-tax income increased even more, by 476%.
The third line in the figure offers some perspective by showing the change in the pre-tax median household income over the same period, which grew just 13.2%. The median pre-tax household income for a family of four in 2007 was $50,233, while the top-earning 400 households earned a median $345 million, almost 6900 times as much income. In contrast, in 1992 the ratio was just a sixth as large, with the top 400 households having 1124 times as much income.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Facts reported at a recent Dallas Women's Foundation forum. . .
Consider:
- Texas low-income households pay more in state/local taxes as a share of their income than do the rest of us.
- Texas operates the 5th most regressive tax system in the United States.
- Low per-capita state taxes (49th in the nation) limit Texas' ability to draw down federal dollars for health care, child care and many other human services.
- Households earning below $27,088 use 12.4% of their income on taxes.
- Households earning over $117,899 use 4.9% of their income on taxes.
- Medicaid in Texas covers only 1 out of 8 low-income working age women (2008).
- Texas doctors accept new Medicaid patients at these rates: OB/GYN: 42%; Pediatrics: 42%; Family Medicine: 30%--shortage of doctors to serve the poor challenges the state and public health.
- 90% of direct care workers in the US are women. In Texas, home care aides earned $7.05 an hour and home health aides earned $8.03 an hour (2008).
- Public school spending/investment per pupil in Texas: $8,307.
- Texas ranks 50th in percent of females age 25+ with at least high school diploma.
- Texas school finance challenge is not just one of equity, but adequacy--2006 cut in property taxes created a $9 billion loss each biennium.
- Tuition increases in major Texas universities from 2003 to 2008 average 71%.
- Texas child care workers earn$7.82 per hour--41st in the US (2008).
- Texas ranks 46th in child care funding for low-income children.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Bad policy, bad business
I keep running across really disheartening statistics about the status of public benefits for low-income Texas children and families.
Consider just in the area of nutrition:
Bad, unconcerned policy translates to terrible business outcomes.
When will we wake up in Texas and make sure that Texas tax dollars stay or return to Texas in ways that benefit those in need of a lift, as well as those driving our local economy.
What affects one sector, affects all sectors.
Consider just in the area of nutrition:
- Out of over 300,000 eligible Dallas area children, < 9% receive the benefits of the Texas Summer Lunch Program.
- Only 41% of eligible families receive the benefits afforded by SNAP (the Texas Food Stamp program).
- Vendors prepare and sell those summer meals, putting money into our local economy, creating jobs and supporting business services.
- Dallas County loses an estimated $500,000,000 annually in retail groceries sales because of our inability or unwillingness to register everyone who is eligible for SNAP, funds lost to local businesses.
Bad, unconcerned policy translates to terrible business outcomes.
When will we wake up in Texas and make sure that Texas tax dollars stay or return to Texas in ways that benefit those in need of a lift, as well as those driving our local economy.
What affects one sector, affects all sectors.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
2010. . .running start
2010 blasted off for us.
Thanks to American Recovery Act funding, we have been able to assist scores of families with rent and utility assistance that, undoubtedly, has kept many in homes and off the tough Dallas streets. We're very grateful for our partnership with the City of Dallas (fiscal agent for the federal funds) that allows us to meet so many really great families who are trying hard to stablize in the down economy.
During 2009, our Resource Center (Food Pantry) distributed 1,835,114 pounds of grocery products valued at $2,734,320. Agapito Perez told me recently that he intends to distribute at least three million pounds during 2010. Based on our January numbers for 2010, we're on pace to distribute twice as much as during 2009.
I pray for the day when we can close the Food Pantry.
But in the meantime, we open our doors daily to receive and welcome our neighbors and friends who look to us as a partial solution to the challenging puzzle of economic survival in the inner city.
The people make it all worthwhile. It's all about the wonderful people.
Thanks to American Recovery Act funding, we have been able to assist scores of families with rent and utility assistance that, undoubtedly, has kept many in homes and off the tough Dallas streets. We're very grateful for our partnership with the City of Dallas (fiscal agent for the federal funds) that allows us to meet so many really great families who are trying hard to stablize in the down economy.
During 2009, our Resource Center (Food Pantry) distributed 1,835,114 pounds of grocery products valued at $2,734,320. Agapito Perez told me recently that he intends to distribute at least three million pounds during 2010. Based on our January numbers for 2010, we're on pace to distribute twice as much as during 2009.
I pray for the day when we can close the Food Pantry.
But in the meantime, we open our doors daily to receive and welcome our neighbors and friends who look to us as a partial solution to the challenging puzzle of economic survival in the inner city.
The people make it all worthwhile. It's all about the wonderful people.
Thursday, February 04, 2010
Income inequality, economic gaps and social dysfunction. . .
For a fascinating and very important interview Big Think interview with Dr. Kate Pickett, Epidemiologist, University of York, click here. If you decide to watch the interview via the link, be aware that she is answering questions that appear on the screen during the interview and that break up her comments.
The information shared here is extremely important as we think about income inequality and the urban centers of the United States.
One takeaway: whether we like it or not, we're all in this life together.
Here is a transcript of the conversation for those who prefer to read rather than watch and listen:
Kate Pickett: I’m Kate Pickett. And I’m a Professor of Epidemiology at the University of York in England.
Question: What is the relationship between economic growth and life expectancy?
Kate Pickett: What we find is, in the rich developed market democracies, there’s no longer any relationship between average levels of income in a country and life expectance. So, you can have a country like the USA, or Norway, that’s twice a rich as another country like Greece for instance, and that doesn’t seem to affect life expectancy at all. And the same is true of happiness. Happiness isn’t related to average levels of income in a country either. Now, that’s not true of the developing world when you don’t have enough, when people are lacking food or shelter, or the basic material necessities. Then economic growth is really important. But in our rich, developed democracies, it no longer makes any difference. So, we seem to have come to an end of what economic growth can do for us in terms of life expectance, happiness, well-being and that sort of thing.
If you look at the United States, over the past few decades, you’ve become twice, three times a rich as you used to be, levels of happiness haven’t improved at all.
Question: How does social inequality affect our health?
Kate Pickett: I think this is where it helps that Richard Wilkinson, my co-author and I, we’re epidemiologists, and so we study levels of population health. And one thing we really learned over the past 30 years in epidemiology is the importance of psycho-social factors for health. Things like low social status, or social affiliation, social networks, whether or not you have friends, and the stresses of early childhood. All of those things have turned out to be really important for health. And we have quite a good understanding now of the biology of chronic stress. So, all of these things are working as stresses, low social status, lack of friends or social networks, stress in early childhood. And chronic stress affects our biology, our physiology in lots of different ways. It affects our immune system, our hormonal responses, it affects our cardiovascular health. And that’s quite well understood. And so we have also known for a long time that the people at the bottom of society, the poorer people in our societies, people living in the most deprived neighborhoods have much higher levels of stress and much worse health than those who are more affluent or have higher social status.
Question: Is there a threshold for when economic growth stops affecting life expectancy?
Kate Pickett: Yeah, it’s not so much about the threshold, the threshold changes over time. It’s really just seeing that although life expectancy continues to improve over time, that’s not related to average levels of income anymore in the rich countries. Instead, what we find is really important is the level of income and equality that is the gap between the rich and the poor. That’s what seems to matter these days for our health and social well being.
Question: Why are humans prone to developing unequal societies?
Kate Pickett: Well, I think we’ve lived in every kind of society. I mean, for a lot of our existence as human beings, we’ve lived in fairly egalitarian, hunter/gather societies. But we’ve also lived in very hierarchical tyrannies as well. We clearly can manage to exist in both and develop all kinds of different societies. Why hierarchy seems to matter, why status differences matter so much and so the gap between rich and poor matters, is because as human beings, we are very sensitive to social relationship. We have an evolved psychology that makes us very aware about how others judge us.
If you think about it, some of the most difficult things to do, or the most potentially embarrassing situations wherein, those where other people can judge us negatively. Rather like what I’m doing now, which might go out and been seen by hopefully thousands of people and they might think I’m doing a good job, or a bad job, and being aware of that can make us feel very embarrassed, be very aware of how others judge us, and that really affects our psychology and our biology in very profound ways.
So, if we’re looking at societies where the social distances between people are bigger as they are in unequal societies, there’s just more potential for all of us to feel we are judged negatively by others and to feel that our status really matters, that it’s really important.
Question: What is the Social-Evaluative Threat?
Kate Pickett: Social-Evaluative Threat that’s a term psychologist’s use. There are two psychologists who looked at all the studies that other researches have done on what kind of stresses most reliably raise our cortisol levels. What kinds of stress most reliably stress us? And they usually do this kind of work by inviting students into the laboratory and asking them to do unpleasant tasks. The might ask them to solve math problems or to write about an unpleasant experience, or be videotaped doing something. And the question these researchers asked was, which kind of stress most reliably raises our stress hormone levels? And they found it was ones which contained a social-evaluative threat. So, it’s not so much having to do math problems, it’s having to read out your real marks at the end and your scores and share them with other people. It’s tasks in which other people can judge you negatively, that most reliably make you feel stressed.
Question: How does status anxiety link with consumerism?
Kate Pickett: Well, in our modern societies, we don’t really need to consume more stuff for basic survival. We consume, we shop, and we want to earn more money to show our status. And so, owning things that demonstrate that we are keeping up, keeping up appearances that show we are a valued member of society, that’s why we consume so much. In more unequal societies that competition for status is more important. And so, in more unequal societies there is a stronger drive toward status competition and consumerism. All of those things matter more, matters more to earn more money, not because you need more money for basic things, but you need to show your status relative to other people in society.
Question: What is the link between greater inequality and public health?
Kate Pickett: We look at more and less equal countries, and let me describe what I mean by that. We use income equality as a measure of how hierarchical a society is, how unequal it is. And so we’re comparing – we’re looking at countries and looking at how much richer the top 20% of the population are compared to the bottom 20%. It’s ratio of the top fifth to the bottom fifth of incomes. And in more equal countries like Japan, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, the top 20% earn about 3 ½ to 4 times as much as the bottom 20%. And in the more unequal countries like the UK, where I’m from, the USA, Portugal, Australia, Singapore, it’s 7 ½ to 9 times as much. So, that’s the scale of inequality that we’re looking at.
And what we do in our book is take that scale of income differences and look to see how it affect a range of health and social problems in different societies. And we find that more unequal societies have lower levels of trust, higher levels of mental illness, worse physical health, more obesity, their children do less well in schools, there are more teenage births, more violence, as you just mentioned, a greater percentage of the population is in prison and social mobility is lower as well. So, everything seems to get worse in more unequal societies. This is a general social dysfunction. And because this is politically quite sensitive, we thought we’d test it all out again in separate setting. So, we compared the 50 states of the USA as a sort of independent test, and again, we look at levels of income and equality in the 50 different states and compare that tot heir level of health and social problems. And it’s a remarkably consistent picture. So that all those health and social problems are worse in the more unequal states.
And we think this human sensitivity to social relationships is the underpinning cause of all of those problems. You asked about violence, and in a more unequal society, of course, there are more people who don’t have access to the kinds of things that give us status, money, jobs, cars, employment, those sorts of things. And in a society where social judgments can be harsher, those at the bottom are going to be much more sensitive to threats to their status. And we know from the work of prison psychiatrists, for instance, that being disrespected, or humiliated, or potentially losing face is the most common trigger for violence of all. So, I think that’s the link between greater inequality and high levels of violence.
And the differences are huge. If we compare, for instance, the American states and Canadian Provinces, in the more equal of those, there are about 15 million, sorry, 15 murders per million residents per year. And in the more unequal, it’s about 150. So that’s a ten-fold difference, ten times the murder rate in the more unequal places than the more equal ones.
Question: What is the connection between sustainability and equality?
Kate Pickett: Yeah. I mean, I think this goes back to the idea I was talking about earlier that, in a sense, in the rich developed countries we’ve come to the end of what economic growth can do for us in terms of better quality of life. We also know that we’ve got to constrain economic growth to deal with the challenges of climate change. And we need to develop more sustainable economies. And we think that equality has an important role to play here in several different ways. The first is the increased status competition that I talked about in more unequal societies. That drives consumerism. And we know that high levels of consumerism are a major cause of high levels of carbon emissions and that we need to rein in consumerism to cope with climate change. So, I think more equal societies will be better places to be able to do that because there will be less drive to consume.
Also because we find that levels of trust are much higher in more equal places, social cohesion is better. People are more willing to act together for the common good, there’s a greater public spiritedness and people are less out for themselves. And we see that in more equal countries, this translates into the way the population acts with respect to the planet and with respect to other countries. For instance, more equal countries donate more in foreign aid. A greater portion of their national income is given in foreign aid and they do better at recycling across a whole variety of waste goods. And in more equal countries, business leaders are more likely agree that their government should comply with environmental regulations. So, there are all kinds of ways in which more equal societies seem better able to act for the common good.
But there’s a third thing as well, and I think this is really important because I think a lot of people have thought in the past that we need a certain level of inequality to drive aspirations and creativity. And we’ve actually found that using a sort of proxy measure of innovation, we use the number of patterns grounded per head of population, sort of a measure of innovation and creativity, and we find that there is a significant tendency for more equal countries to have a higher level of patterns grounded per capita than the more unequal ones. Probably because in more unequal societies educational achievement is lower and social mobility is lower. So, they’re wasting a much higher proportion of their potential human capital.
So in terms of consumerism, acting in a public spirited way, and being creative and innovative, it looks as if greater equality might be a very necessary precondition as far as coping with climate change.
Question: What practical steps can countries take to enhance equality?
Kate Pickett: I think the first thing to note is that not only do we find that inequality is related to a whole range of social problems, we also find that it affects the vast majority of the population, and I think that’s really key to getting greater support for measures that would make our societies more equal. Greater equality won’t just benefit the poorer in our society; the benefits seem to extend all the way up the population so that even among the wealthier, more educated, affluent sections of our populations, they are healthier and do better in a more equal society. So, I think that’s really key.
But we also find that it is the level of inequality that matters for all of these health and social problems and it doesn’t seem to matter how that greater equality is achieved. So we often point to the contrasts between Sweden and Japan, for instance. Both of them are at the more equal end of the spectrum and they do very well in terms of health and social problems. But they achieve their greater equality in very different ways.
Sweden has quite large income differences to start with and redistributes through taxes and benefits, whereas Japan has smaller income differences to start with. And that doesn’t seem to matter, it’s the level of inequality of equality that they achieve that matters. And we find the same contrast actually among the U.S. states. So, we have two states bordering each other, Vermont and New Hampshire, culturally very alike, but New Hampshire has very low levels of state expenditure and taxation and Vermont much higher. So, New Hampshire looks a bit more like Japan and Vermont a bit more like Sweden. But because they are among the more equal states, they do very well in terms of health and social problems.
So we don’t advocate any particular way of achieving greater equality. There are big state interventions that could work such as higher tax rates on higher incomes, or raising minimum wage levels. But there are sort of small state solutions as well that are around institutions, how companies decide to set their salary structures. And it does seem that where there is more economic democracy, more employees on the board for instance, or promotions from within a company, more employees owning shares in a company. Income differences within those institutions are kept smaller. So, there are lots of different ways that greater equality can be achieved
Question: Why do Cubans live longer on average than Americans?
Kate Pickett: Sure. If you look at the international rankings of life expectancy, yes, the U.S.A. does particularly badly among the rich developed countries, which is fairly recent. You used to be one of the high performers in terms of life expectancy. And it’s interesting; actually, that the U.S.A. and Japan have rather swapped places after the Second World War and Japan was a very unequal country with very poor levels of life expectancy, whereas America was very equal and performed very well internationally with life expectancy. And since that time, you’ve swapped places. So that America has become much more unequal and slipped down the rankings of life expectancy and Japan has become much more equal and now has the highest life expectancy in the world, and crime rates have come down, etc. And there are countries that are much poorer. You mentioned Cuba, but we can also look at Costa Rica, and some of the other Latin American countries and some of the poorer European countries, such as Greece that achieve life expectancies as high, or higher than the United States without that higher level of affluence.
Question: Is the U.S. inherently unequal?
Kate Pickett: Although the U.S.A. does come very near the top in terms of income inequality today among the rich capitalist countries, only Singapore does worse in our dataset. This isn’t a sort of fixed American problem. In the past, after the Second World War and right up through the 1970’s, you were one of the more equal of the western developed countries. And so, it’s not anti-American to suggest that American society might become more egalitarian, more equal. That’s actually very characteristic of your fairly recent past. And it’s certain true of the founding principles on which your country or society is based.
And so, although I think Americans have perhaps gotten used to high levels of inequality in the very recent past, you do have a long tradition of a more egalitarian ethos and of smaller income differences in your society. And so, I think the American Dream isn’t dead, although levels of social mobility are much slower here, educational performance is suffering, you can look to your past, I think, to recover that hope and that optimism and see it as a very true American ambition to have the kind of society that offers a fair opportunity for everybody.
The information shared here is extremely important as we think about income inequality and the urban centers of the United States.
One takeaway: whether we like it or not, we're all in this life together.
Here is a transcript of the conversation for those who prefer to read rather than watch and listen:
Kate Pickett: I’m Kate Pickett. And I’m a Professor of Epidemiology at the University of York in England.
Question: What is the relationship between economic growth and life expectancy?
Kate Pickett: What we find is, in the rich developed market democracies, there’s no longer any relationship between average levels of income in a country and life expectance. So, you can have a country like the USA, or Norway, that’s twice a rich as another country like Greece for instance, and that doesn’t seem to affect life expectancy at all. And the same is true of happiness. Happiness isn’t related to average levels of income in a country either. Now, that’s not true of the developing world when you don’t have enough, when people are lacking food or shelter, or the basic material necessities. Then economic growth is really important. But in our rich, developed democracies, it no longer makes any difference. So, we seem to have come to an end of what economic growth can do for us in terms of life expectance, happiness, well-being and that sort of thing.
If you look at the United States, over the past few decades, you’ve become twice, three times a rich as you used to be, levels of happiness haven’t improved at all.
Question: How does social inequality affect our health?
Kate Pickett: I think this is where it helps that Richard Wilkinson, my co-author and I, we’re epidemiologists, and so we study levels of population health. And one thing we really learned over the past 30 years in epidemiology is the importance of psycho-social factors for health. Things like low social status, or social affiliation, social networks, whether or not you have friends, and the stresses of early childhood. All of those things have turned out to be really important for health. And we have quite a good understanding now of the biology of chronic stress. So, all of these things are working as stresses, low social status, lack of friends or social networks, stress in early childhood. And chronic stress affects our biology, our physiology in lots of different ways. It affects our immune system, our hormonal responses, it affects our cardiovascular health. And that’s quite well understood. And so we have also known for a long time that the people at the bottom of society, the poorer people in our societies, people living in the most deprived neighborhoods have much higher levels of stress and much worse health than those who are more affluent or have higher social status.
Question: Is there a threshold for when economic growth stops affecting life expectancy?
Kate Pickett: Yeah, it’s not so much about the threshold, the threshold changes over time. It’s really just seeing that although life expectancy continues to improve over time, that’s not related to average levels of income anymore in the rich countries. Instead, what we find is really important is the level of income and equality that is the gap between the rich and the poor. That’s what seems to matter these days for our health and social well being.
Question: Why are humans prone to developing unequal societies?
Kate Pickett: Well, I think we’ve lived in every kind of society. I mean, for a lot of our existence as human beings, we’ve lived in fairly egalitarian, hunter/gather societies. But we’ve also lived in very hierarchical tyrannies as well. We clearly can manage to exist in both and develop all kinds of different societies. Why hierarchy seems to matter, why status differences matter so much and so the gap between rich and poor matters, is because as human beings, we are very sensitive to social relationship. We have an evolved psychology that makes us very aware about how others judge us.
If you think about it, some of the most difficult things to do, or the most potentially embarrassing situations wherein, those where other people can judge us negatively. Rather like what I’m doing now, which might go out and been seen by hopefully thousands of people and they might think I’m doing a good job, or a bad job, and being aware of that can make us feel very embarrassed, be very aware of how others judge us, and that really affects our psychology and our biology in very profound ways.
So, if we’re looking at societies where the social distances between people are bigger as they are in unequal societies, there’s just more potential for all of us to feel we are judged negatively by others and to feel that our status really matters, that it’s really important.
Question: What is the Social-Evaluative Threat?
Kate Pickett: Social-Evaluative Threat that’s a term psychologist’s use. There are two psychologists who looked at all the studies that other researches have done on what kind of stresses most reliably raise our cortisol levels. What kinds of stress most reliably stress us? And they usually do this kind of work by inviting students into the laboratory and asking them to do unpleasant tasks. The might ask them to solve math problems or to write about an unpleasant experience, or be videotaped doing something. And the question these researchers asked was, which kind of stress most reliably raises our stress hormone levels? And they found it was ones which contained a social-evaluative threat. So, it’s not so much having to do math problems, it’s having to read out your real marks at the end and your scores and share them with other people. It’s tasks in which other people can judge you negatively, that most reliably make you feel stressed.
Question: How does status anxiety link with consumerism?
Kate Pickett: Well, in our modern societies, we don’t really need to consume more stuff for basic survival. We consume, we shop, and we want to earn more money to show our status. And so, owning things that demonstrate that we are keeping up, keeping up appearances that show we are a valued member of society, that’s why we consume so much. In more unequal societies that competition for status is more important. And so, in more unequal societies there is a stronger drive toward status competition and consumerism. All of those things matter more, matters more to earn more money, not because you need more money for basic things, but you need to show your status relative to other people in society.
Question: What is the link between greater inequality and public health?
Kate Pickett: We look at more and less equal countries, and let me describe what I mean by that. We use income equality as a measure of how hierarchical a society is, how unequal it is. And so we’re comparing – we’re looking at countries and looking at how much richer the top 20% of the population are compared to the bottom 20%. It’s ratio of the top fifth to the bottom fifth of incomes. And in more equal countries like Japan, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, the top 20% earn about 3 ½ to 4 times as much as the bottom 20%. And in the more unequal countries like the UK, where I’m from, the USA, Portugal, Australia, Singapore, it’s 7 ½ to 9 times as much. So, that’s the scale of inequality that we’re looking at.
And what we do in our book is take that scale of income differences and look to see how it affect a range of health and social problems in different societies. And we find that more unequal societies have lower levels of trust, higher levels of mental illness, worse physical health, more obesity, their children do less well in schools, there are more teenage births, more violence, as you just mentioned, a greater percentage of the population is in prison and social mobility is lower as well. So, everything seems to get worse in more unequal societies. This is a general social dysfunction. And because this is politically quite sensitive, we thought we’d test it all out again in separate setting. So, we compared the 50 states of the USA as a sort of independent test, and again, we look at levels of income and equality in the 50 different states and compare that tot heir level of health and social problems. And it’s a remarkably consistent picture. So that all those health and social problems are worse in the more unequal states.
And we think this human sensitivity to social relationships is the underpinning cause of all of those problems. You asked about violence, and in a more unequal society, of course, there are more people who don’t have access to the kinds of things that give us status, money, jobs, cars, employment, those sorts of things. And in a society where social judgments can be harsher, those at the bottom are going to be much more sensitive to threats to their status. And we know from the work of prison psychiatrists, for instance, that being disrespected, or humiliated, or potentially losing face is the most common trigger for violence of all. So, I think that’s the link between greater inequality and high levels of violence.
And the differences are huge. If we compare, for instance, the American states and Canadian Provinces, in the more equal of those, there are about 15 million, sorry, 15 murders per million residents per year. And in the more unequal, it’s about 150. So that’s a ten-fold difference, ten times the murder rate in the more unequal places than the more equal ones.
Question: What is the connection between sustainability and equality?
Kate Pickett: Yeah. I mean, I think this goes back to the idea I was talking about earlier that, in a sense, in the rich developed countries we’ve come to the end of what economic growth can do for us in terms of better quality of life. We also know that we’ve got to constrain economic growth to deal with the challenges of climate change. And we need to develop more sustainable economies. And we think that equality has an important role to play here in several different ways. The first is the increased status competition that I talked about in more unequal societies. That drives consumerism. And we know that high levels of consumerism are a major cause of high levels of carbon emissions and that we need to rein in consumerism to cope with climate change. So, I think more equal societies will be better places to be able to do that because there will be less drive to consume.
Also because we find that levels of trust are much higher in more equal places, social cohesion is better. People are more willing to act together for the common good, there’s a greater public spiritedness and people are less out for themselves. And we see that in more equal countries, this translates into the way the population acts with respect to the planet and with respect to other countries. For instance, more equal countries donate more in foreign aid. A greater portion of their national income is given in foreign aid and they do better at recycling across a whole variety of waste goods. And in more equal countries, business leaders are more likely agree that their government should comply with environmental regulations. So, there are all kinds of ways in which more equal societies seem better able to act for the common good.
But there’s a third thing as well, and I think this is really important because I think a lot of people have thought in the past that we need a certain level of inequality to drive aspirations and creativity. And we’ve actually found that using a sort of proxy measure of innovation, we use the number of patterns grounded per head of population, sort of a measure of innovation and creativity, and we find that there is a significant tendency for more equal countries to have a higher level of patterns grounded per capita than the more unequal ones. Probably because in more unequal societies educational achievement is lower and social mobility is lower. So, they’re wasting a much higher proportion of their potential human capital.
So in terms of consumerism, acting in a public spirited way, and being creative and innovative, it looks as if greater equality might be a very necessary precondition as far as coping with climate change.
Question: What practical steps can countries take to enhance equality?
Kate Pickett: I think the first thing to note is that not only do we find that inequality is related to a whole range of social problems, we also find that it affects the vast majority of the population, and I think that’s really key to getting greater support for measures that would make our societies more equal. Greater equality won’t just benefit the poorer in our society; the benefits seem to extend all the way up the population so that even among the wealthier, more educated, affluent sections of our populations, they are healthier and do better in a more equal society. So, I think that’s really key.
But we also find that it is the level of inequality that matters for all of these health and social problems and it doesn’t seem to matter how that greater equality is achieved. So we often point to the contrasts between Sweden and Japan, for instance. Both of them are at the more equal end of the spectrum and they do very well in terms of health and social problems. But they achieve their greater equality in very different ways.
Sweden has quite large income differences to start with and redistributes through taxes and benefits, whereas Japan has smaller income differences to start with. And that doesn’t seem to matter, it’s the level of inequality of equality that they achieve that matters. And we find the same contrast actually among the U.S. states. So, we have two states bordering each other, Vermont and New Hampshire, culturally very alike, but New Hampshire has very low levels of state expenditure and taxation and Vermont much higher. So, New Hampshire looks a bit more like Japan and Vermont a bit more like Sweden. But because they are among the more equal states, they do very well in terms of health and social problems.
So we don’t advocate any particular way of achieving greater equality. There are big state interventions that could work such as higher tax rates on higher incomes, or raising minimum wage levels. But there are sort of small state solutions as well that are around institutions, how companies decide to set their salary structures. And it does seem that where there is more economic democracy, more employees on the board for instance, or promotions from within a company, more employees owning shares in a company. Income differences within those institutions are kept smaller. So, there are lots of different ways that greater equality can be achieved
Question: Why do Cubans live longer on average than Americans?
Kate Pickett: Sure. If you look at the international rankings of life expectancy, yes, the U.S.A. does particularly badly among the rich developed countries, which is fairly recent. You used to be one of the high performers in terms of life expectancy. And it’s interesting; actually, that the U.S.A. and Japan have rather swapped places after the Second World War and Japan was a very unequal country with very poor levels of life expectancy, whereas America was very equal and performed very well internationally with life expectancy. And since that time, you’ve swapped places. So that America has become much more unequal and slipped down the rankings of life expectancy and Japan has become much more equal and now has the highest life expectancy in the world, and crime rates have come down, etc. And there are countries that are much poorer. You mentioned Cuba, but we can also look at Costa Rica, and some of the other Latin American countries and some of the poorer European countries, such as Greece that achieve life expectancies as high, or higher than the United States without that higher level of affluence.
Question: Is the U.S. inherently unequal?
Kate Pickett: Although the U.S.A. does come very near the top in terms of income inequality today among the rich capitalist countries, only Singapore does worse in our dataset. This isn’t a sort of fixed American problem. In the past, after the Second World War and right up through the 1970’s, you were one of the more equal of the western developed countries. And so, it’s not anti-American to suggest that American society might become more egalitarian, more equal. That’s actually very characteristic of your fairly recent past. And it’s certain true of the founding principles on which your country or society is based.
And so, although I think Americans have perhaps gotten used to high levels of inequality in the very recent past, you do have a long tradition of a more egalitarian ethos and of smaller income differences in your society. And so, I think the American Dream isn’t dead, although levels of social mobility are much slower here, educational performance is suffering, you can look to your past, I think, to recover that hope and that optimism and see it as a very true American ambition to have the kind of society that offers a fair opportunity for everybody.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)