Higher wages the key to escaping poverty

Published August 14, 2014

by Gene Nichol, UNC Center of Poverty, published in News and Observer, August 13, 2014.

Evidence of North Carolina’s singular, and singularly unacknowledged, poverty crisis cascades.

We’ve long known our increase in general poverty levels is one of the steepest in the nation. A decade ago, we ranked 26th among the states, a tad better than average. Now we’re 11th, pushing past our competitors. A brutal 26 percent of our kids live in poverty, 41 percent of our children of color. The Department of Agriculture announced, last year, Greensboro is the second hungriest city in America. Asheville’s ninth. Feeding America reported earlier we have the country’s second highest hunger rate for kids under 5, trailing only Louisiana.

Then, a few weeks ago, the Census Bureau announced North Carolina has, in the last decade, experienced a greater rise in concentrated poverty (census tracts where 20 percent or more are poor) than any other state. Business Insider, last week, peeled back the data to reveal that four of the 10 American cities with the sharpest increases in concentrated poverty are ours. Winston-Salem was ninth, Greensboro sixth, Charlotte fourth and Raleigh third. We’re the Super Bowl champs of exploding concentrated poverty.

Harvard recently determined that, of the nation’s 50 largest cities, Charlotte has the worst economic mobility. Dead last. If you’re born poor in Charlotte, you’re more apt to stay that way than anywhere in America. Harvard apparently thinks if you’re born poor in Charlotte, you should move.

Standard & Poor’s piled on last week, concluding that the gap between rich and poor in the U.S. has become so extreme it’s damaging the entire economy. S&P declared such intense disparity markedly hampers economic growth and has slowed our anemic recovery. And that’s Standard & Poor’s, not The Nation magazine. North Carolina has among the worst economic inequality rates in the country. Over the last three decades, the top 1 percent of Tar Heels saw their incomes grow by 98.4 percent, while the bottom 99 percent inched up only 9 percent.

And what has been the response of our leaders to this unfolding parade of horrors? Nary a word, of course. Either they don’t know we’re sliding over the precipice or they don’t consider it worthy of comment. One wonders if the governor has a fiddle.

On the policy front, we continue our path-breaking experiment to redistribute resources from the distressed to the well-heeled. It is hard to believe a government could respond to the landscape described above by denying Medicaid to hundreds of thousands, enacting the largest unemployment compensation cut in history and ending the earned income tax credit – to pay for bold tax cuts for those at the top. Either the bottom third doesn’t count, or our legislators actually believe in an occult economic strategy that defies logic, data, history and common sense. I’m guessing it’s the former.

I’ve been surprised, though, in recent conversations with folks across the state living in or near poverty, how consistent the perception of problem is. In Charlotte, Durham, Raleigh, Salisbury, Hickory, Rocky Mount, Lumberton, Winston-Salem and Goldsboro, residents have explained that assistance is important but what they really crave are jobs that pay wages they can live on. You can’t do that at $7.25 an hour. They want the chance to advance when they work hard. If they could make a decent, humane wage, they explain, they wouldn’t have to worry about food stamps or rent subsidies or bus passes or being able to buy the basics for their kids. They’d “do it on their own.”

As one of my heroes puts it: “I want to grow. I want to have a life like others have. I want a salary to make ends meet. Even if it’s McDonald’s, I’d like to be able to afford to go out and get some ice cream with my kids. I want to be able to put back into our neighborhood. None of us can do that.” Like so many others, she asks: “why don’t you care whether the people who work for you can have a life if they work hard and do right by you”?

An array of states, and a handful of American cities, have adopted minimum wage laws that exceed the $7.25 federal standard. North Carolina should as well. We added 276,000 jobs between January 2010 and June 2014. But a demoralizing percentage were low-paying, service industry positions. Charlotte and Raleigh are strong enough to move forward on their own if (when) the legislature balks.

The politics are tough, I concede. But when you talk to Tar Heels living at the edge, the refrain recurs: “It’s the wages, stupid.”

Gene Nichol is Boyd Tinsley distinguished professor at the UNC School of Law and director of the school’s Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity. He doesn’t speak for UNC.

August 14, 2014 at 10:29 am
Norm Kelly says:

This editorial appeared in the Noise & Disturber. What can we expect? Support for socialism? Of course not. The N&D would NEVER do that.

When one reads this post with the intent of understanding it, looking at it from the view of an educated person, the facts of the matter become somewhat more clear. The intent of the N&D is normally, not always but normally, to support the talking points memo of the Socialist Party of the US, formerly known at the Democrat Party.

For instance, the post says 'Over the last three decades, the top 1 percent of Tar Heels saw their incomes grow by 98.4 percent, while the bottom 99 percent inched up only 9 percent'. What's the salient point here? Look closely. You will notice that the Republicans have controlled Raleigh for a scant portion of the past 3 decades. For libs who failed math, 3 decades translates into 30 YEARS! How long have Republicans and (mostly) conservative ideas been tried in Raleigh? About 3? Maybe 4. So what do the FACTS tell us about North Carolina and it's economy? That for the majority of 30 years socialist schemes implemented by the Demon party HAVE NOT had the effect they told us they wanted. The Demon party schemes have had THE OPPOSITE effect! Instead of redistribution HELPING alleviate poverty, the socialist idea of redistribution has MADE POVERTY WORSE! And when the occupier implemented some of HIS schemes, what has been the net result? The entire economy is slowing, causing more disparity between the 'rich' and the 'poor'!

What is the conclusion of the N&D writer? Certainly NOT anything logical or educated! It's 'One wonders if the governor has a fiddle'. Of course, since the governor is a Republican, who has been in office less than 1 term, it just HAS to be his fault. Kinda like the coal ash ponds that have existed 'for decades' but suddenly it's Pat's fault cuz he's the one in office when the disaster was made public! Does the author wonder about the programs implemented by prior Demon govs that made the situation worse? Of course not, that would be 'disingenuous', to use a good lib word.

'our path-breaking experiment to redistribute resources'. You see, when one supports stealing money from 'the rich' to give it to 'the poor' then it's not called 'redistribution'. But when 'the rich' are allowed to keep the money THEY EARN, then it's called a path-breaking experiment to redistribute money earned BY PEOPLE to the PEOPLE WHO EARN IT! If anyone needs proof that socialism/liberalism is the most outrageous, illogical, confused scheme in the world, with it's own destruction/failure built in, I don't want to know that person! I can't deal with people who see the facts right in front of their face and CHOOSE to ignore them! If you graduated from a school where you were allowed to believe that 2+2=5, then you are a lib voter and believe this editorial. If you have the ability to look at facts and draw logical conclusions, you already are a conservative, know the intent of this editorial, and are willing to take the time & effort to become self-educated.

'our legislators actually believe in an occult economic strategy'. You mean the strategy that says a rising tide lifts all boats? Or the occult strategy that says when you take from one group to give to another group, all groups are better off? The occult strategy that tells one group of people they don't have to work for a living, they can live off the economic activity of another group? The occult strategy that exists in Europe and is decades ahead of the US, where governments are cutting unemployment payments, retirement ages are being increased, companies are being allowed to increase work week hours to improve employment and productivity? Some regions in Europe that have experimented with socialism for decades longer than we have are backing away from it. Some in Europe even warned the US NOT to experiment with socialized medicine, but the occupier was hell-bent to implement it anyway. And how well is socialized medicine phase 1 working out for our country? Be honest, even you libs! Germany experimented with government 'support' of solar power and other renewable energy schemes. They spent gobs o' money on their schemes. And not a single bit of it was fruitful. How did the German gov't respond? They stopped giving money to alternative energy companies to blow through, and told them to stand on their own and become profitable if it was a plausible business. How did the occupier respond? Throwing money down the hole by giving tax dollars to his supporters with the 'goal' of producing viable alternative energy sources. Except it was only payback for campaign supporters very loosely disguised as business loans for a desired product that couldn't stand on it's own in the private sector. The net effect is that the US experience with alternative energy is exactly the same as Germany's but our beloved occupier didn't learn the lesson!

As for minimum wage increases - how about finding out what the qualifications are of the people you talk to about forcing companies to pay them more? How many of the people complaining about minimum wage jobs actually have the skills to do the job or get a better job? How many of them didn't bother graduating from high school? How many of them just barely passed high school? How many of them EXPECT the government to take care of them if the CHOOSE not to take care of themselves? Since the occupier took over control, how many part-time jobs have been created versus how many full-time jobs? Does this have ANYTHING to do with socialists' desire to force companies to pay unskilled labor a higher wage?

I don't have the time or patience to continue to show why/how this editorial is so wrong. I have to work for a living. Well, I guess it's not 'have to' work, but I choose to work cuz I like the freedom it brings me. If I had the time, I could shred the writer of this editorial and his socialist stand on issues. There MUST be a safety net and not a single libertarian, conservative, or Republican is saying otherwise. The diff between the right and the socialists is the level of 'safety net', how much should be stolen from producers, and what the proper level of interference in the private sector is for government. The state tried the socialist way for the majority of the 30 years this writer 'worries' about. How well did it work for the state? Yet, we are less than 4 years into trying it a different way, and this editorial writer appears to be dismayed that it hasn't had the dramatic effect he wanted. 30 years of socialism didn't do the trick. Why is it that <4 years of conservatism hasn't undone everything that was done in 30 plus years of socialism? I wonder also! But that may be just how far the left has buried this state and our country! Honesty among libs is in short supply. Economic strategy is unknown to libs. Socialism has it's own failure built in. But they haven't figured this out yet and want us to go along with them until THEY realize what WE already know! Except since THEY refuse to recognize facts, will they ever realize the truth?