We gotta grow some jobs, and that's a fact, and we probably aren't going to be able to do it with big ol' jobs programs funded by the Federal Government, what with today's politics and all, and that means if this Administration wants to stay in the jobs game they're going to have to find some smaller and more creative ways to do it.
They are also going to have to come up with ideas that are pretty much "bulletproof", meaning that they are so hard to object to that even Allen West and Louie Gohmert will not want to be on record saying "no no no!"; alternatively, solutions that work around the legislative process entirely could represent the other form of "bulletproof-ery".
Well, I have one of those "maybe bulletproof" ideas for you today, and it has to do with how "Made in USA" the things are that our Government buys.
It's a great saying: "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime". And it applies to nuclear power in major ways, even if the crime of epic-scale poisoning or wasted investment on a massive scale was or was not "intentional". Or if some yahoo uses a nuclear weapon, or a nuke as a weapon, or if a yahoo country does the same. All that money down the drain that was put into a weapon(s) that can't be used unless self destruction of that person, that country (including the people in that country) is seriously considered a possibility. In the case of a nuclear war, the destruction of "our species" has to be considered via a massive "first strike" and/or via the retaliation by those who got nuked, weren't happy about it, and had the means and wherewithal to effect this retaliation. Who would even want to consider crap like that as a template for our future? And what if the crime was intentional? Is there a difference to those rapidly killed by poisoning or eventually by being "cancered", as to whether it was an accident or deliberate?
"To me, the best thing the federal govenrment [sic] can do is stop trying to create jobs," [Nan] Hayworth, a Republican representing the 19th Congressional District, said before a crowd of business leaders. http://bit.ly/eONCWe
The biggest job killer is the huge shift in wealth from the middle class to the top 1% which has occurred over the last 30 years. Right wing pundits constantly chime "class warfare," but the American middle class is far more productive now than ever in the past and yet their incomes have declined. We are getting ripped off! Since most people have less to spend as compared to what they produce, they are unable to buy the equivalent of what they produce. Eventually, that means that workers get laid off.
The shift in wealth comes from tax cutting at the top, and government cuts to things that matter to middle class Americans, such as education, health care and infrastructure, just to name a few.
Ms.Hayworth wants to believe that the best job creation comes from the American entrepreneurial spirit. (As GW Bush liked to say, "The problem with the French is they don't have a word for entrepreneur."). But even entrepreneurs need a market to sell their creative ideas and widgets. If only the top 1% have discretionary spending money, there is no market to sell to. How many iPads can the Hayworth household consume?
and essentially the complete LACK of Green Jobs. When you don't have people employed in manufacturing renewable energy systems, you've got a problem. And since most forms of renewable energy are money losers at the present time...there are not going to be a lot of Green Jobs in that field.
And giving more subsidies to renewable energy producers so that there is a market demand for renewable energy systems is not going to help much, especially when the benefits of those subsidies are essentially ONLY the REALLY, REALLY rich. That is not how you make a populist based movement.
Similarly, while you think you can raise the cost and prices of pollution based energy and thus make pollution energy jobs go away, that still won't necessarily make it profitable or at least economically viable to make renewable energy. And when you raise the cost of coal based electricity from 3 c/kw-hr to 14 c/kw-hr via taxes/fees or whatever you wish to call them, do you seriously think that is politically viable? Not with the present congressional and senatorial make-up, nor with the one likely to be in place after the 2010 elections. Even if the Democrats don't lose any seats, you still won't be able to put sufficient CO2 pollution taxes on coal and natural gas, or to eliminate the grotesque nuke subsidies to make most renewables in most places sufficiently viable.
So, you should check out Feed-In Laws for starts. And then help work on ways to make Feed-In Laws possible in some states (which will become all states when the economic advantages and job creation potential of these become evident). For example, here is a take on it that you might want to consider:
http://wnymedia.net/wnymedia/t...
Personally, I think that people can demonstrate till the cows come home, and get arrested by the millions and it still won't be as effective as making renewable energy economically viable and providing Green Jobs. Without Green Jobs, the vast majority of poor and middle class people won't buy the arguments of the minority of us liberals and progressives. But Green Jobs will make believers of them, their neighbors and their relatives.
Nb41
This comment was made by yours truly on this recent and well meaning (but perhaps way too much wishful thinking about the "goodness" of energy addicted Americans now, in general, dreadfully worried about potential impending unemployment and resulting impoverishment) posting on dKos:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/...
As I pick up the pace of work again, coming into the midterms, I have to get some stories cleared off the desk in order to make room for some others, and that's what we're about today.
We'll be talking about saving more than 300,000 of this country's most important jobs, and paying for it in a way that is not only good policy, but is a real problem for Republicans who are yelling "no new taxes!" once again while pretending they care about actually paying for actual spending and actually want to cut actual unemployment.
We have a bit of work to do today, but we want to keep it somewhat short...so let's get going.
Introduction
In most countries of the world, virtually all forms of energy are subsidized to some extent, and the U.S. is presently a firm believer in subsidies. For example, why would oil and natural gas (Ngas) extraction in the Gulf of Mexico (GOMEX) be allowed to happen with virtually no royalties, and also apparently no common sense and no likely regulation/inspection of Blowout Preventers (BOPs)? Or what about the two wars being waged - all oil related. Or what about the enormous military/naval/air force protection given to certain oil endowed areas, like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait? Odds are, those subsidies could be worth easily $80/bbl, about equal to the price paid for oil imported into this country (about $1 billion/day).
However, oil is almost exclusively used for chemicals or transportation - very little is used to make electricity any more. Oil has been priced out of the U.S. electricity market, as it is too expensive a fuel. For example, bulk fuel oil at $2/gallon (retail at $3/gallon) has a thermal price of nearly $16/MBtu; In contrast, natural gas (Ngas) goes for around $4.29/MBtu (before transportation costs of about $1.30/MBtu) on 5-28-2010 - almost 1/4 of the cost of fuel oil. The two fossil fuels of note in the U.S. for electricity production are now coal and Ngas.
Some have claimed that if the subsidies on fossil fuels were removed, then renewable energy sources would be competitive. Or, more properly, SOME renewable energy sources might be competitive in the electricity market. After all, production costs for renewable energy systems depend on what type is used and where they are located, in addition to what might be the allowed prices (such as Feed-In Laws). However, the degree to which these subsidies have to be removed, and the extent that polluting (coal, Ngas, nuke sourced) electricity prices will have to rise before renewables become the lower cost electricity production methods might surprise a lot of people.
We have learned during the course of the "War on Terror", that uneducated, under-employed, racist, disaffected men are the prime societal demographic who become terrorists.
That is why it was disturbing to read this on CNN.com today:
...a recent post on a blog encouraged people to throw bricks at local Democratic offices nationwide.
The Alabama-based blog, called "Sipsey Street Irregulars" http://sipseystreetirregulars.... a "window war" against Democrats and has kept a tally of the recent incidents of damage...
Blogger Michael B. Vanderboegh of Pinson, Alabama, told CNN Monday that in a Friday blog...he called for people to break windows at Democratic headquarters at the city and county level.
"My answer is violence, by getting their attention...if we can get across to the other side, that they are within inches of provoking a civil war in this country, then that's a good thing."
Now, I don't know the background of these so-called "3 Percenters", but my guess is they are not holding advanced degrees or celebrating America's diversity.
After surfing their Web site, I learned that they hate "Arabs" and "liberals", and blame everything wrong in their lives on everybody but themselves, tus justifying their extreme actions.
What do you get when you substitute in "Americans" and "Christians" in the above sentence? Why you get a terrorist - and that is what these groups are willing to be.
At every accomplishment of the current administration, at every improvement enacted by Congress, I still hold out hope that people will begin to realize the benefits of progressive governance, and the logic of equal social and economic opportunities for all.
The Republican party has to be reminded they share in the responsibility of governing this nation. Unfortunately, they continue, time and again to shirk that responsibility. The rhetoric used by the Republican party and their allied "tea partiers" have energized most, if not all, domestic anti-government groups (ie, domestic terrorists).
Attention New Yorkers,
(and/or, please send this to anyone you know who is a New Yorker):
Here is a quick entry about a petition to get our Assembly/Senate off its duff and pass some job creating (and at NO COST to the essentially empty NY State treasury!!!) and super environmental friendly legislation:
If you can, please sign it. And tell others about it.
Feed-In Laws work better than any other system yet devised to install renewable energy in mass quantities and at lower real cost than with subsidy and quota systems. Yet their main purpose is the creation of high value added manufacturing (and related spin-off) jobs. All at zero cost to tax payers - no need to bribe the excessively rich to invest in what they should be investing in, anyway. The non-polluting electricity made as a result of them is just a nice by-product of this system, which is how Germany, Denmark and Spain (to name a few) have moved to the top of the list in terms of job creation via renewable energy system manufacture, R&D and installation.
Good for the world, good for the pocketbook, a good way to lower our dreadful unemployment rate and a way to make a better world. For those curious, here is the actual legislation via these links:
I'm not a dis-interested party here - I guess I am partly responsible for getting this initially introduced into the Legislature (a bit of an accident, but if that's what it takes... and there is some powerful logic to Feed-in Laws, which prevailed). But I've had a lot of help in this. And we will most definitely need more help to get this one over the finish line.
Thanks to Chuck Schumer, one of our very local issues is getting some attention from entities as notable as the New York Times (registration required to read) and the NBA.
Adidas is planning to move most production of N.B.A. players' official jerseys and shorts out of the United States, managers of the main factory producing the gear said on Tuesday.
With the decision threatening 100 jobs at the factory, American Classic Outfitters in Perry, N.Y., 50 miles east of Buffalo, Senator Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, urged Adidas not to move the jersey operation.
"It is flat wrong for Adidas to move the production of jerseys worn by N.B.A. players outside the United States when there are U.S. companies that have done this work so well and for so long," Schumer said. "And to do it in this economic climate adds insult to injury."
Schumer said he might ask the N.B.A.'s commissioner, David Stern, to intervene.
Good for Senator Schumer. Speaking as someone who lives just a few miles from Perry and has been over there many times, 100 jobs are something that could make or break a community out here. Despite the low cost to employ workers out here, far lower than in the cities, there are still very few manufacturing jobs available in the rural areas where they're badly needed. A company like Adidas, considering relocating to some sweatshop operation in China to save a few dollars, could end up pulling the plug on hundreds of real people--the workers, their spouses and children, and all the others who rely on that money coming into the town to run their own small businesses.
In these towns, every dime of outside money means the world, and 100 jobs can mean the difference between survival and slow economic starvation.
With luck Senator Schumer will lay down the law with Adidas over this travesty. When that happens, it's my hope that the Senator would be interested in coming out here and visiting the town he helped keep alive.
The first 100 days has become a milestone for executives at all levels of government. But no executive is scrutinized more after the first 100 days than the President of the United States.
How did those four items impact New York? According to a state-by-state spreadsheet that breaks down how many people benefited from the SCHIP expansion, the ARRA and the tax credits, New Yorkers were assisted in a big way.
The spreadsheet shows that due to the expansion of SCHIP, 267,000 more children are covered that weren't covered before. The expansion of SCHIP was something that the 110th Congress did pass, but President George W. Bush stood in the way (along with fellow Republicans) and prevented the expansion from taking place. Thanks to a stronger majority in both houses of Congress and President Obama, SCHIP expansion is reality.
The Making Work Pay Tax Credit provides a refundable tax credit up to $400 for individuals and $800 for married couples. The impact of this tax credit on New York was huge. Approximately 6,760,000 New Yorkers will be recipients of the Making Work Pay Tax Credit.
The American Opportunity Tax Credit is a provision that President Obama proposed on the campaign trail that helped Americans pay for post-secondary education. The provision allows for a $4,000 partially refundable tax credit to help individuals pay for attendance at a public college or university. For those attending community colleges, it would make community college virtually free. In return, the student must complete 100 hours of community service with a government unit, hospital or non-profit organization. Nearly 295,000 New Yorkers will be recipients of the American Opportunity Tax Credit (formerly known as the Hope Credit). And while the provision in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was only temporary, President Obama's budget called for making the provision permanent.
And has been repeated over the last few months, 215,000 jobs would be created or saved in New York through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
There are plenty of others who will look at President Obama's first 100 days from a national perspective. I chose to look at it from a New York perspective. Are we better off now than we were under President Bush? There is no doubt about it. We have made great progress over the last three months and will continue to head in the right direction under Obama's leadership. While we have a long road head, Obama has proven over the last few months that he is willing to tackle the tough challenges, not run from them. That is an admirable trait and that is why he has been nothing but successful in his first 100 days as President of the United States.
Like most parts of the country, New York's 20th District is concerned about the economy and specifically jobs. It stands to reason then that the two men running to replace Kirsten Gillibrand in that district would be stressing jobs and job creation. The problem is that one of them, Jim Tedisco, is making claims about his job creation record that are basically bunk. CBS 6 in Albany did a little fact checking. Their conclusion? Tedisco, a career politician, is largely full of it while Scott Murphy, a businessman, is delivering the goods.
We start our fact check with Jim Tedisco. The fine print under those 3,000 jobs that he takes credit for helping to create. Well S 6.863A and S.7721B, its state legislation that he voted for that created and later strengthened the Metroplex Authority. That brings new business to Schenectady County, three thousand is the total number of jobs Metroplex says it has created, I checked on that. But in talking to both sides, Democrats and Republicans who were there at the beginning they all agree that Tedisco didn't really have a lot to do with the actual creation of Metroplex. It was a project spearheaded by city, county and business leaders. The Tedisco campaign counters that Tedisco was and still is one of Metroplex's strongest supporters.
Now, I consider myself one of the "strongest supporters" of New York Giants. This does not mean I can claim any credit for Super Bowl XLII. Nice try, Jimmy Disco.
Now on to Scott Murphy. He says he helped create more than 1,000 jobs. Unlike Tedisco he gives no on-screen footnote to back up the claim so I asked the Murphy campaign for a breakdown of those jobs. They provided me with dozens of documents that showed New York State companies that show Murphy, and his company Advantage Capital provided capital to, to get up off the ground and running. Kionix, in Ithaca, 119 jobs created. PECO Pallet in Yonkers, 47 jobs created. Just a couple of examples. Murphy's signature is there on official State documents. Many of the investments were done through a state program called CAPCO to help small businesses in financially distressed areas. Now I also went one step further and I checked with some of those companies. One of them is the Golden Goal Lacrosse Park in Fort Anne, a corporate headquarters in New Jersey, they were indeed very familiar with Scott Murphy and immediately confirmed for me that he has helped them create jobs. I got the same story when I called that company Kionix in Ithaca.
Scott Murphy has created jobs in the real world, lots of them. Jim Tedisco has been a cheerleader on the sidelines for projects made real by others and is now trying to take credit for them. That's just a fact.
Which brings me to this. Given that newly minted RNC chair Michael Steele has made this race a top priority and even appeared personally with Tedisco recently said:
"You and I know that in the history of mankind and womankind, government-federal, state or local-has never created one job."
Which is it, Mr. Tedisco? How can Tedisco continue to claim that he's responsible for creating 3,000 jobs (a laughable claim disputed by both Democrats and Republicans) from his perch in Albany, a claim that is simply not borne out by the facts? How can Tedisco claim to be a job creator while in government when the leader of his own party claims with a straight face that "never in the history of mankind..." has government ever created a job. Jimmy's claim makes even less sense when one considers that Tedisco is running to join a Republican House caucus that, when faced with a rapidly deteriorating economy and accelerating job losses, voted en masse to do...nothing. Since Tedisco refuses to say whether he would have been the only Republican in the House to vote differently, I think it's fair to assume that he would have voted along with the rest of the do nothings.
Essentially, it all boils down to this. Scott Murphy has put his money where his mouth is, creating jobs, with real money, real investment and real risk, out in the real world. Jim Tedisco, a career politician in Albany has not. Period.
The number of U.S. workers continuing to claim jobless benefits notched a fresh record in the second week of February, Labor Department data showed on Thursday, while new claims for aid were the highest since 1982.
The number of people remaining on the benefits roll after drawing an initial week of assistance increased by 114,000 to a 5.112 million in the week ended Feb. 14, the most recent week for which data is available. The so-called continued claims topped every estimate in a Reuters poll of 15 economists, which had a consensus forecast of 5.00 million.
Initial claims for state unemployment insurance benefits increased to a seasonally adjusted 667,000 in the week ended Feb. 21 from a revised 631,000 the prior week, the Labor Department said. It was the highest reading since October 1982, when claims reached 695,000.
The year-long U.S. recession has savaged the labor market and sent the unemployment rate soaring, with some economists fearing it will pierce 9 percent in 2009 from 7.6 percent in January and mount further next year.
I think it would come as a surprise to the woman who delivers my mail to learn that she doesn't really have a job. And it would also come as a surprise to a lot of people working in the private sector to learn that they have lifetime employment guarantees. And since the troops in Afghanistan don't have actual jobs, maybe we should stop paying them?
Watching the reaction from Republicans and most news outlets, I keep thinking of an analogy. There's a nine-alarm fire, and Obama's the fire chief. He wants to send the cavalry, hoping to save lives and contain the fire from spreading out of control, while simultaneously taking fire-prevention steps for the future. Soon, Republicans start wondering if 2% of the tools on the fire-engines are entirely necessary for fighting the fire. Democrats think nine trucks is an excessive number, and maybe if Obama sent seven, it'll make Republicans happier. (Said Sen. Ben Nelson, "I don't know, hundreds of gallons of water sounds like an awful lot.")
Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Lou Dobbs, and Joe Scarborough try to convince the community that Obama is making a big mistake trying to put out a fire with water, which is just socialism in disguise.
Conservatives want to know why Obama won't just give people a tax cut, so the public can buy fire-extinguishers, axes, and Dalmatians of their own. The Washington Post runs four op-eds from Amity Shlaes, arguing that Fire Chief Roosevelt overreacted during the last nine-alarm fire, and it would have gone out on its own if he'd just left it alone.
And while the fire keeps burning, the Senate wants to figure out how to address the fire in a way that costs less and satisfies the concerns of "centrists."
And it's not like this crisis isn't real. Just ask our pal btp at Rochester Turning. He just got laid off.
I say this all not to cry on anyone's shoulder, or to brag about how unbelievably awesome I am, but to send out a warning- I am really, really good at what I do, I have a broad skillset, excellent communication skills, and have worked in small privately held companies as well as Fortune 500 companies. I regularly outperform management expectations, and have typically been "pulled" into new positions of greater responsibility.
Yet everywhere I am looking, networking, applying, all are saying this is the worst economic situation they've seen. And I'm afraid it's only going to get worse. Even though I'm at the top of my game, the economy has been mis-managed and roto-tilled into a game of musical chairs where they're suddenly removing 25%+ of the chairs.
This warning will hopefully not depress people, but stir you into action.
I've gone from being a supporter of Obama and a robust stimulus package to possibly a benefactor of it.
So, if for nothing else, please- for me, and my 3 little kids, please call senators Schumer and Gillibrand. If not for me, you all have friends and family likely going through the same thing-do it for them...and tell the staffer that you're calling to urge your them to "support the Obama economic recovery plan and oppose all conservative amendments." Call back and repeat for our other senator. The toll-free number: 866-544-7573.
If you were in a "eh, I could eat" kind of place about the stimulus, I'm asking you personally to call, right now, and let me know what they say, in the comments.
Thanks. The job you save may be your own.
This economy is getting worse by the hour. It's time to actually do something about it.
If Obama is going to continue to produce these addresses and distribute them on YouTube, I guess I'll start posting them when they come out on Saturdays.
This week, the President-elect speaks about his plan to jumpstart this really, really bad economy and create 2.5 million jobs by 2011. He says he'll do it with significant investment in public works programs that will rebuild the nation's crumbling infrastructure as well as the development of a green energy economy. When does he want to do it?
Joe Mesi released two key campaign pieces today when he announced his five point plan for jobs in Western New York and also came out with his first TV ad reaching out to voters in the 61st Senate District.
First, the television ad. Here it is:
Mesi's five point plan for jobs focuses on creating jobs in Western New York as well as keeping jobs in the area. Job creation is one thing. Keeping those jobs here is another. We know that better than anyone.
Here is Mesi's five point plan:
1. Target investments to build on our strengths. The science advances at UB and the bioinformatics and cancer research taking place at Roswell Park should help attract the kind of high-tech jobs that will keep our kids here-and give them a real future. In the Senate, Joe Mesi will fight to increase funding for our universities.
2. Reform Empire Zones and Industrial Development Agencies. These programs provide breaks to businesses who promise to create jobs. But too often, we end up subsidizing businesses that are cutting jobs, not creating them. That's got to change. We have to hold them accountable and make sure they keep their promises, so our kids can stay here and find good jobs.
3. Lower Property Taxes because high tax rates put us at a competitive disadvantage and discourage businesses from locating here.
4. End Tax Breaks for Corporations that Move Our Jobs Out of State. In just the past year, the Republican-led Senate defeated an anti-outsourcing bill. There's no excuse for Albany helping CEOs outsource our jobs-with our tax dollars, leaving New York families holding the bill. It should be the Senate's job to protect our jobs.
5. Grow Green Industries. Western New York should be a model in growing "green industries." Mesi's plan will cut energy costs, create jobs in growing economic sectors, and curbing global warming by investing in renewable energy and training the next generation of workers.
Mesi knows where our focus has to be. This should be the focus of other legislators in Western New York. We have the resources to have green energy industries flourish here. We also have strong colleges and universities that should be utilized. We do have plenty of land for Empire Zones, which is why Empire Zones need to be reined in. We need companies who utilize Empire Zones for tax breaks to be held accountable to make sure they are creating the jobs they said they would.
Expanding on his call to stop outsourcing, Darrel Aubertine today announced a four-part plan to retain and create jobs by stimulating the regional economy.
In the Assembly, Darrel has worked to keep the River Hospital open for business, to expand Fort Drum, to save 900 jobs at Alcoa and to revitalize downtown Watertown.
Building on that success, Darrel's "Our Jobs" plan protects jobs and promotes the economy by focusing on efforts to retain good-paying jobs; to reform economic development programs; to reduce costs for business; and to reinvest in the regional infrastructure.
"We have to do everything in our power to save good jobs and create an environment in which new jobs can grow," said Aubertine. "I have a detailed plan to do that. It will not be easy -- but nothing worth doing ever is. Our families and our communities need a State Senator who will do everything possible to keep and create jobs."
Crossposted from the DMIBlog where guest blogger Paul Brophy of the American Assembly writes about a new report that everyone upstate and downstate should be talking about.
The mainstream macro-economists tell us that globalization is good for the world and good for the United States. Maybe, maybe not. But two things seem certain: Globalization is here to stay, and it produces big disruptions in places that have lost manufacturing jobs to China and other low-wage countries.
In the United States, those places are our older industrial metro areas, whose economic health is key to America's competitiveness. The largest 100 metro areas contain 65% of our population and produce three quarters of our gross domestic product. Some are thriving, but others have yet to find their footing in the global economy. Over 65 metro areas from Baltimore to Beaumont, New Orleans to Newark (see the full list here), are currently in a downward spiral of declining jobs, population, tax revenues and other vital signs.
How can mayors and county executives in these places cope?
In the radio interview Linda Gibbs, NYC Deputy Mayor for Health and Human Services notes how difficult living in poverty is for families and suggests the money is helpful to poor parents and their children. She says, "It can be really tough to do the right thing when you're living in a poor household in a poor community and every day a choice of one right thing compromises another right thing. And the family members that I talk to, I think, actually felt more respected and acknowledged for the difficulty of their situation rather than insulted."
Gibbs point hits home to low-income and poor women and families and yet her words seem at odds with policy.
Here at Hunter College it is back to school for everyone. Parents who are raising young children and going to school at the same time started the crushing schedule of getting their children to school and themselves to class and work prepared and on time. Most of the women I work with are receiving welfare and going to college. They talk about getting up at 5 am to get themselves dressed before waking their children and supervising their dressing, breakfast and trip to school. It is extraordinary effort that allows them to accomplish their tasks and without any cash to spare. The welfare cash benefit for a family of 3 is $291 a month. All transportation, clothes and school supplies come from that cash allotment. It is shamefully inadequate.
Today, Roxanna Henry Welfare Rights Initiative's (WRI) Legal Advocacy Organizer is testifying at a public hearing on the adequacy of the public assistance grant in New York State conducted by the Assembly Committee on Social Services.
WRI and other organizations of the Empire State Economic Security Campaign are calling for the state to raise the welfare grant. Mayor Bloomberg's private funds can be helpful to a small group of families but policy changes on the state and city level can have a whopping positive affect on all poor families.
What Bloomberg is doing is charity that has the ability to help empower by making choices easier but lasting empowerment comes from policies that aid people receiving welfare to get family sustaining jobs. However, just increasing the grants alone is not adequate and the Bloomberg administration needs to stop harassing people in welfare out of going to class. Mayor Bloomberg's current welfare policy insists that people need to take dead-end workfare jobs instead of getting training and education. Preventing access to the skills that get good jobs is disempowering and bad policy.
Charity vs. Empowerment is a false choice. We need and have both and government needs to pick up its end.
NYC would do well to get out in front of the welfare grant increase and speak to the Governor and get it done.
In addition, Gibbs' acknowledgment about poor families with children being strained to accomplish everything they need to accomplish speaks right to the heart of government lagging in policy. As Deputy Mayor, Gibbs can work to direct HRA to adhere to the federal welfare guidelines which require 20 hours of workfare for families with children under the age of six whereas in NYC families with young children must perform 35 . 20 is the federal law and in NYC it should be our law.
The poverty discussion and projects coming from Mayor Bloomberg's office are encouraging and we look forward to his team hitting the solution mark closer and closer to the problem.
But it's not all threat. There's also opportunity. We know how to fight global warming in a way that benefits the environment, saves taxpayers money, and creates new "green" jobs.
