Working and Poor in the USA

[OneBlueSky]

I agree with this article completely . . . the issue that the Democrats should be jumping on is the inability of decent, hard-working, everyday Americans to support themselves, even while working a full-time job . . . some families can't even do it working two full-time jobs . . . this issue is a winner if ever I saw one . . .

Working and Poor in the USA
A vast impoverished population languishes in the midst of our economy.

by Beth Shulman
The Nation
February 9, 2004

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040209&s=shulman

For generations, Americans shared a tacit understanding that if you worked hard, you could earn a livable income and provide basic security for yourself and your family. That promise has been broken. More than 30 million Americans--one in four workers--are stuck in low-wage jobs that do not provide the basics for a decent life.

As we celebrate the fortieth anniversary of President Johnson's declaration of the War on Poverty, we are reminded that economic growth alone is not sufficient to combat the problem. Today, the war on poverty must be fought not on the margins but in the very mainstream of our economy. It must be a war to restore the promise of work.

While the Democratic presidential contenders are vocal about general economic conditions, ill-advised tax cuts and continuing unemployment, they have only recently begun to point out a fundamental economic failure--the failure of work to meet people's needs.

Finding ways to make sure that people who work hard can take care of their families would put the Democrats on the offensive instead of their customary defensive position on family values. It would have broad appeal to working Americans, as millions of middle-income jobs take on the characteristics of the low-wage economy--layoffs, outsourcing, unaffordable healthcare and vanishing pension benefits. And it would have great potential to help those suffering in low-wage jobs--workers like Cynthia Porter.

- more . . . and worth the read . . .

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040209&s=shulman

[DuctapeFatwa]

1. I wish I could agree that it would have broad appeal to the voting class

The reality is that the poor are barely on the radar of either party, and when they do hit the radar, it is usually along the lines of pointing out the need for increased criminalization of homelessness, to be more supportive of business interests.

Visible homeless is bad for business. Cities bemoan the lack of funds to help them "clean up" more aggressively.

[Pobeka]

2. Sad but true n/t.

[OneBlueSky]

3. I think the theory here is if you champion the issue . . .

you can get these people out to vote . . . and there are an awful lot of working poor in this country . . . far more than enough to swing an election with even a modest turnout . . .

[DuctapeFatwa]

4. It is an admirable sentiment, however the reality is that the poor are

for all practical intents and purposes, disenfranchised, by design. Voters are the top 25% income tier. That leaves 75%
Large numbers of poor voting would, if those votes were indeed counted, constitute a revolution. It would not be in the interests of politicians or either party, or the corporations that help them with their careers. Instead of being declared "unelectable" for even suggesting a Living Wage, any politician who did not move heaven and earth to immediately produce one would be out on his ear.
The polls are open for 12 hours on a working day.

The theoretical "2 hours off to vote" is of little use to people who enjoy a 2 or 3 hour commute, one way, from the slum where they live to the affluent area in which they are allowed to work.

Additionally, although the are popularly considered to be less sophisticated and more gullible than their better-heeled brothers, their faith tradition is less likely to include a strong belief in the voting process.

This is not helped by the fact that from a practical standpoint, neither party has anything to offer them.

Few landlords accept pretty words and stirring rhetoric on the first of them month in lieu of cash.

A political solution to the crisis is no longer a realistic possibility.

[solinvictus]

5. "2 hours off"

Most working poor people's jobs prevent them from voting. Like you said, they're taking unpaid time to leave and often, transportation issues make it impossible to vote and complete a full day at work. It's hard to convince someone scraping by that losing wages is worth filling out a sheet of paper that offers no hope of material improvement to their own life.

[sweetheart]

6. isn't an absentee ballot an option?

can't someone who can't visit the polls post in a ballot?... just curious after reading your remark.

[Sugarbleus]

7. Yes, they can vote by absentee...THERE IS HOPE

Ahem...........I am the "working poor" I am partially disabled now. I earn, as a live in aide, $400 gross per month period. I am neither unsophisticated nor uneducated. How poor does one have to be to be stupid?

I understand what some of you are trying to say, but it's not hopeless for we poor. When the bottom tier of the middle class begins to tumble down here with me, there will be, as there seems to be now, a shout heard round the world. When meaningful jobs never come back and MBA's, like the woman working next to my daughter at HOME DEPOT, stay unemployed too long, politicians will experience a rude awakening.

Be careful of what you wish for...

[Snappy]

8. Edwards

As far as I know Edwards is the only candidate that is talking about the people living in poverty and that includes the working poor. This country is the richest on the planet and we have 35 Million poor people. That is an outrage!!! The Repugs don't care at all about these people. In fact, they deride them. I believe that if the Govt. rounded up poor people and put them in work camps that the Repugs would applaude that.

[IrateCitizen]

9. Edwards just recently picked it up -- Kucinich has always been

Of course, Kucinich isn't "electable", so it's not surprising that so many people weren't paying attention to this.

[DuctapeFatwa]

10. Sure! next time you're talking with a single mom who earns $6/hr

cleaning hotel rooms be sure and ask her if she's arranged for her absentee ballot.

[cryofan]

11. Great thread! Here are my thoughts

Reasons that the working poor do not vote are: because they are disorganized or apathetic or too busy. For some part of the working poor, they are poor because as biological machines, they do not function as well as most people: Low IQ, disorganized, etc.

For another part of the working poor, they are too busy: many kids, plus one or more low paying jobs leaves little time to vote, or to even look into getting an absentee ballot.

Of course, we deliberately do not provide more convenient voting access, e.g., voting on Sunday, etc. No surprise there: those in power disguise their intentions. But I see through them :-)

And if you read CHomsky on voter apathy, he outlines some interesting ideas about how the lower class is deliberately rendered apathetic regarding voting.

All that aside, I think this corporate capitalist society is wrongheaded: we should use human greed and the innate social status needs of humans to make life easier for everyone. We should have lots of public housing, and universal healthcare, and a minimum citizens income, all paid for by taxation. We have the resources to do that. But the upper income groups and the ruling elite and those who already have made their way in the world successfully, they all use their power and money and extra time to make sure that their position in society is maintained.

I just have to look at the folly that is human existence and laugh at it all....the mad scramble for social status and children and power....why not just organize live life comfortably instead of striving for the newest SUV? Why not put all of our energies into basic biological research and providing the best universal health care, a baseline housing and food and income for everyone. Why not put our spare energies into life extension sciences such as cryonics? Ah, we are creatures of basic social status drives, and for the vast majority, logic is just a tool to be used to further those ends, and not the rational ones.....

[DuctapeFatwa]

12. and to be brutally frank, why should they?

Even if they have the resources and information necessary to obtain an absentee ballot, or are unemployed and live within walking distance of their polling place?

It is a source of amazement to me how many well-intentioned, rosy-cheeked and clear-eyed "campaign volunteers" sincerely believe that people who are wondering how to pay their light bill, pay their ever-spiraling rent, even those who have already been priced out and are living under overpasses, should be enthusiastic about the opportunity to vote for a rich man who is not going to lower their rent, multiply their hourly wage, or get them into housing.

Yes, the brochures are attractive, and the speeches are rousing, and the candidates are telegenic.

But it is yet another indication of the utter failure on the part of the affluent class, even the most "caring and concerned" among them, to comprehend the reality of those who do not have the luxury of leaving their comfortable homes with their well-stocked kitchens, dressed in their designer "casual" wear, to indulge their interest in which rich folks will get richer this time.