Presentation on theme: "National Trends in Poverty, Income Disparity, and Economic Security"— Presentation transcript:
1National Trends in Poverty, Income Disparity, and Economic Security August 21, 2014: SessionJim Masters: CCAP, NCRT.Allen Stansbury, Senior Associate.Center for Community FuturesDenise Harlow, CCAP, NCRTCommunity Action Partnership
2Agenda Welcome and Introductions Technology Overview Learning Communities Resource Center OverviewKey themes for the National Trends Learning ClusterReading DiscussionNext Set of AssignmentsMeeting Schedule
3The Learning Communities Resource Center Funded by OCS-2 year projectThe full project is the “Learning Community”5 Primary Learning ClustersDecreasing Family HomelessnessIncreasing Financial Empowerment for FamiliesIncreasing Organizational Capacity (Board Governance)Utilizing Place-Based StrategiesBundling Services to Improve Outcomes3 Specialty Learning ClustersNational Trends in PovertyStandards Implementation for States-Links with OSCOETracking CSBG Dollars-Links with ROMA Next Generation
4Information Will Be Posted on the Partnership’s Website www Information Will Be Posted on the Partnership’s Website
5Learning Cluster on National Trends Major shapers of a society 1. Demographics (30%) 2. Economics (including science, technology and trade) (30%) 3. Social values (Alexis de Tocqueville) (20%) 4. These interact – in odd combinations -- to shape public policy. (5%)
6Session 9 Topic Areas:Changing Demographics of Poverty today in the USUS Economy A Perspective by Robert Reich, UC Berkeley Professor of Political PolicyPoverty’s Transformation in America: America’s New Working Poor, its former Middle ClassThe stagnation or decline of wages and salariesIncome Inequality: Household Income and Assets Accumulation Trends to Higher Income BracketsPoverty is now Mainstream: The Decline of Upward Mobility
7Session 10 Topic Areas: Seeking a New Approach America’s Frayed Safety-NetStrategies for a solution to curb growing poverty in the USDraft White Paper DiscussionNation-wide Survey Questionnaire
8Changing Demographics of Poverty Today in the US US demographic TRENDS
9US Demographic Megatrend Highlights MACRO TRENDS:US population growth rate: rate of increase has declined to less than 1% per year up from a high of 1.8% in the early 60’s.Life expectancy: a graying nation but expectancy varies greatlyUrban vs rural: continued migration from rural to urban communitiesThe US Family make-up: on an evolutionary pathTRENDS SHAPING POVERTY:Households: growing single head of households and/or shared householdsUS Birth rate: steadily declining, but more unwed mothersMore children in poverty in the last 20 yearsDiversity and immigration: Adds up to greater national strength but little upward mobility for minorities
10US PopulationPopulation doubled from 1950 census of 152 million to million in 2010.Declining growth rate from 1.8% to less than 1% as shown in the red line below.
11Declining US Birth Rate US births reached an all-time high of more than 4.3 million in 2007 dip to 3.9 million.First-time mothers later in life: average age of first-time mothers rose from 21.4 years in 1970 to 25.0 years in First birth rates aged 40–44 stable during the 1970s and early 1980s, but increased more than four-fold from 1985 through 2012 (from 0.5 to 2.3).Significant declines in teen childbearing that began after 1991 have strengthened in recent years.
12Increasing Life Expectancy US Population is aging regardless of gender or ethnicity is at 78.5 up from an 1965 estimated But it stands 20th of 34 developed nationsLife expectancy varies by ethnicity - life expectancy for all American’s in 2013Males (76.0) and females (80.9) andWhites (78.8),Black (74.5),Hispanic (81.2).1965 estimates black males lived on average to 61 and females to age 66.6
13Life Expectancy, Education and Ethnicity In 2008 white males with 16+ years of education live 14.2 years longer than black men with less than 12 yrs of education, for women difference is 10.3 yrs. Trends in disparities at the educational extremes are widening. In 1990 the most educated men and women lived 13.4 years and 7.7 years longer, respectively, than the least educated. Differences in life expectancy at birth between the most and least educated, within race/sex groups, in 1990 the gap in life expectancy between the most and least educated white females was 1.9 years; now it’s 10.4 years, see chart below.
14Accelerating American Retirement Rate 10,000On January 1, 2011 “roughly 10,000 Baby Boomers will turn 65 and about 10,000 more will cross that threshold every day for the next 19 yrs.”Pew Research CenterDec. 29, 2010Baby boomer generation (born ) of 77 million began retiring mid 2000’s. US Census figures for 2010 showed that 13% of the US population is 65 or older. Projections indicate that in 20 years it will be 19.3%Current economic conditions is causing retirement to be postponed; but, in some instances where unemployment is very high, causing early retirement.58% of the US workforce do not participate in a retirement plan be it employer sponsored or through savings in a 401 k program..However, well-educated people increasingly work longer than the less-skilled
15Aging population = Aging Workforce By % of those ages 65 to 74 will still be working. That compares with 20.4% of the same age bracket in the workforce in 2002 and 26.8% who were in the workforce in 2012 (see graphic below)Cutback in pensions during the last 10 years, almost 20% of Americans aged over 65 are now in the labor force, compared with 13% in 2000.The aging of the baby boom increases the proportion in the older age groups, but may be offset by projected immigration into the working age groups.
16US Households Trends: More Single Heads of Households Growing Number of Single Mom and Dad Head of HouseholdsIn 2010 the householder, his or her spouse, and his or her sons and daughters comprised million people or 87 % of the population.Of the 88.8 million children of householders, 93 % were biological children.“Husband-wife households numbered 56.5 million in 2010 and made up 73 % of all family households in 2010.Family households maintained by a female householder with no spouse present numbered 15.3 million, more than twice the number maintained by a male householder with no spouse present (5.8 million).Among nonfamily households, one-person households predominated (31.2 million) and were more than three times as common as nonfamily households with two or more people (8.0 million).More women than men lived alone (17.2 million and 13.9 million, respectively).
17Growing Ethnic Diversity America is becoming a majority minority nationIn 2010 while 80% of American seniors are white, the U.S. population is projected in 2050 to be even.In the last census the Hispanic population grew by 2.2 %, or more than 1.1 million, the most of any group, with 76 % resulting from natural increase.Asians were the fastest-growing major ethnic or racial group growing by 2.9 %, or 530,000, with immigration from overseas accounting for 60 % of that growth.Blacks increased by 559,000, or 1.3 %.Shift in birth and death rates on non-Hispanic whites in part to the recent global recession, and that “the growing number of older non-Hispanic whites, will accelerate rapidly as the baby boom ages, guarantees that non-Hispanic white natural decrease will be a significant part of the nation’s demographic future and in turn offers a young new workforce.
18A Nation of Immigrants1970 the percentage of foreign born in the US was 5-6%, 2010 US Census showed that number to be nearly 13 % or nearly 40 millionForeign-born women had a higher fertility rate than native women.62 % of the foreign born came to live in the United States in 1990 or later, including 35 % who entered in 2000 or later.Of all foreign born who arrived before 1980, 80 % were U.S. citizens in % of the foreign born who arrived between 1980 and 1989 were naturalized citizens.As of 2010, 44 % of all foreign born were naturalized citizens.Foreign born households were 77% compared to 65% of the native population.The average size of foreign born households (3.4 persons) was larger than that of native households (2.5 persons). One reason for this difference is that a higher proportion of foreign-born family households (62 %) than native-born family households (47 %) included children under the age of 18.
19 Racial / Ethnic Makeup of U.S. Poor Population, 1973 and 2010 Latinos represent a much larger part of the poverty picture today than four decades ago.1973: 56 percent of poor Americans were white, 32 percent were black, and 10 percent were Hispanic2010: 42 percent of the poor are white, 23 percent are black, and 29 percent are Hispanic.Hispanics have overtaken poor blacks in number, members of these two groups were about equally likely to be poor in 2010 (27 percent), much more so than whites (10 percent).Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplements
20Share of U.S. Poor Populations by Community / Metro Type, 1970–2010 The poverty rate of suburbia was higher in 2010 (11.4 percent) than in 1970 (8.7 percent),City’s poverty rates grew by an even greater margin (20.9 percent in 2010 versus 14.7 percent in 1970).Mostly concentrated - about four in five residents of extremely poor major metropolitan neighborhoods live in cities.Nonetheless, growing shares of the suburban poor reside in communities of moderate to high poverty, where at least 20 or 30 percent of individuals live below the poverty lineSource: Re-Emergence of Concentrated Poverty: Metropolitan Trends in the 2000s, Brookings Institute
21Child Poverty in the USUS Census figures released in September 2013 showed that record-high numbers of Americans are living in poverty. The latest data reveal:One out of seven people in the USA are living in poverty.In 2012, 46.5 million people were living in poverty in the United States—the largest number in the 54 years the Census has measured poverty.The poverty rate (the percentage of all people in the United States who were poor) also remained at high levels: 15% for all Americans and 21.8% for children under age 18.Almost one out of sixteen people in the USA are living in deep poverty.People with income 50% below the poverty line are commonly referred to as living in deep poverty; Census figures show that, in 2012, 6.6% of our population, or 20.4 million people, were living in deep poverty.Children represent more than one-third of the people living in poverty and deep poverty.In 2012, 73.7 million American children represented 23.7% of the total U.S. population, but made up 34.6% of Americans in poverty and a full 35% of Americans living in deep poverty.Overall, 21.8% of children under 18—or some 16.1 million American youth—were living below the poverty line. Though the poverty rate of 9.1% for Americans aged 65 and older remained steady since 2011, the number of older Americans in poverty increased from 3.6 million to 3.9 million. For citizens aged 18 to 64, 13.7%—26.According to Annie E. Casey Foundation research showed that 23% of children in 2012 are living in families below the poverty line.5 million—lived in poverty.
22Child Poverty In America Ages 5-17 from 2007-2012 US Census map showing percentage-point change in poverty rates among childrenAmong the counties with school-age child poverty rates significantly higher than the national average of 21.1 percent in 2012, 75 percent were in the South. In 2012, there were 13,544 school districts.Of these, 14.7 % had poverty rates greater than 30 percent, for the population of school-age children in families.The five lowest states are Arizona, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico and Mississippi, and the top five states are Massachusetts, Vermont, Iowa, New Hampshire and Minnesota.Map Source:
23America’s Evolving Family Makeup Selected trends impacting America’s Family Makeup:Median age at first marriage was28.2 for men and 26.1 for women in 2010, an increase from 26.8 and 25.1 in An continued increase of a long-term trend since the mid-1950s.Overall percentage of adults who were married declined to 54.1 % in 2010 from 57.3 % in 2000.The average household size declined to 2.59 in 2010, from 2.62 people in 2000 partly because of the increase in one-person households, which rose from 25 % in 2000 to 27 % in 2010, more than double the 13 % in 1960.Households headed by a married couple who had children under 18 living with them declined 3 % in 2010, from 24 % in 2000. “Breadwinner moms,” mothers who are the only or main provider of income for their family rose from 11 percent to 40 percent from 1960 to 2011 (see chart to left).Americans living alone was a mere 9% in 1950 is now 28% today.Children living together with both their parents have been steadily declining since the 1970’s2011 two parent families comprised on about 67% down from about 92% in 1960.
25Inglehart Values Map The global cultural map shows how scores of societies are located on these two dimensionsTraditional values vs Secular-rational valuesSurvival values vs Self-expression values
26America’s Perceptions of Demographic Trends Source: The Public Renders a Split Verdict On Changes in Family Structure, PEW Research Feb. 16, 2011
27A Perspective by Robert Reich, UC Berkeley Professor of Political Policy Us economic trends
28US Economic Trends 1947-2013 Great Prosperity (1947 and 1979) The nation as a whole grew faster and median wages surgedCreating a growing middle classConsuming more goods and services,Creating more and better jobsVS Great Regression ( )Productivity continued to grow, economy continued to expand, wages flatten due to:New technologies,Global competition,But most importantGovernment policies favoring business and investors(Chart Source: Robert Reich, the Limping Middle Class, NY Times)
29Income Gains 1947 to 1979 vs Income losses 1980-2009 Government policies benefiting growing middle class1980 to now Government policies changes benefiting business and investorsBusiness regulations,taxes andfiscal policies
30Wealth Trends in the US 1913-2009 1918 and 1933, 1981 to now:Greater concentration of wealth, whileSlow growth slowedMedian wages stagnated andThen 2 major downturns( , )It’s no mere coincidence that over the last century the top earners’ share of the nation’s total income peaked in 1928 and 2007 — the two years just preceding the biggest downturns.
31Growth of Debt and Women in the Workforce 1947-2009 Women in the work force grew:1960s 12 % of married women with young childrenLate 1990s, 55 % women in the workforceMeanwhile Americans went deeper into debt:From the late 1990s to 2007, the typical household debt grew by a third.
32The Transformation of poverty in America America’s New Working Poor, its former Middle ClassThe Transformation of poverty in America
33Unemployment Rate and Median Household Income Index 2000-2013
34Trends in Real IncomeSource: Saez and Piketty, UC Berkeley, The Economist (9-2013)
35America’s New Working Poor Systematic productivity gains going to the investor and corporate executives not to wage and salary workersResulting in years of wage/salary stagnationAccelerated in the “2001 Bush Tax Cuts” capping the capital gains tax at 15%
36How US Wages and salaries stagnated or decline 1980-2014 Source: Center for Community Futures
37Wage & salary trends in the us The stagnation or decline of wages and salariesWage & salary trends in the us
38Wages & Salaries: Production Out-pacing Wage Trends American Workers have been experiencing wage rate declines and stagnation for some timeBetween 2000 and 2007, the last full business cycle before the start of the Great Recession, productivity grew 16.0 %.But, compensation grew by just 9.4 %Wage and compensation growth in the first few years of this period was buoyed the strong wage and compensation growth of the late 1990s.Accompanying Figure A shows year-by-year productivity growth along with compensation growth as measured by the ECI and the ECEC since It shows that there has been no sustained growth in average compensation since 2004.The weak wage and compensation growth in the 2000–2007 business cycle, combined with the even weaker growth in the Great Recession and its aftermath, mean that average wage and compensation growth was far outpaced by productivity growthThe stagnation began even earlier, in 2003, when considering wages alone.Source: A DECADE OF FLAT WAGES The Key Barrier to Shared Prosperity and a Rising Middle Class,Economic Policy Institute, Lawrence Mishel and Heidi Shierholz, August 21, 2013
39Middle Income Earners trending toward the Working Poor These long-term unemployed are not just unskilled labor but well educated middle class wage and salary earnersUntil the great recession of many were employed their entire life.Only 11 % of those who were long-term unemployed in a given month returned to steady, full-time employment a year laterHalf of the long-term unemployed are non-Hispanic whites.In other words these were the middle class who are now America’s new working poor.
40Wages and Salaries: Wage growth trends In 1964 SSI national wage index* was $4,576.322012 it stood at $44,321.67, nearly a 1,000% increase1992 the raw average wage was $22,002 and the median $15,610, nearly 71%.20 years later ratio declined to 64.75%Meaning that those below the media (50%) are earning lower wages while the average wage earner is earning higher wages*National wage index is based on compensation (wages, tips, and the like) subject to Federal income taxes, as reported by employers on Form W-2
41America’s Workforce Trends: Decline of middle income jobs CEPR the share of good jobs declined overall between 1979 and 2010, however while males were the majority of the jobs lost, there was a steady increase in female employment.Meanwhile the workforce aged during this same time period40% of those good jobs requiring a degree held steady at about 42-45% while those with only a high school degree fell sharply from about 17% to about 5% during the period ofShare of good jobs (one that pays at least $18.50) an hour declined overall between 1979 and 2010,Males were the majority of the jobs lost, there was a steady increase in female employment.
42Household Income and Assets Accumulation Trends to Higher Income Brackets Income Inequality
43Income Inequality Increasing Household income follows a long period in which income concentration remained relatively flat.Economists Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez using U.S. tax returns found that income concentration dropped dramatically following both World Wars and was roughly unchanged for 20yrs.It started climbing again in 1975, reaching pre-World War I levels by 2000U.S. income inequality has now reached levels not seen since 1928 (Saez).In both cases, a similar pattern was in evidence--a boom in the financial sector, over-leveraged lower-income households, a massive, systemic financial crash--and the two worst economic slumps in U.S. history, the Great Depression and Great Recession, followed. A 2011 CBO report shows that real net average U.S. household income grew 62% from , household income growth was much more rapid at the higher end of the income scale than at the middle and lower end.A CBO 2013 follow-up report showed that after-tax average income soared 15.1% for the top 1% from 2009 to 2010, but grew by less than 1% for the bottom 90% over the same time period, and fell for many income groups.Census Bureau estimates that real mean household income increased 0.2% in 2011 and 2012, but it declined for all groups other than those in the top fifth of earners.Source: S&P August 4, 2014 Economic Report: How Increasing Income Inequality Is Dampening U.S. Economic Growth
44Household Wealth Trends 2004-2010 by Income Source: S&P August 4, 2014 Economic Report: How Increasing Income Inequality Is Dampening U.S. Economic Growth
45Economists Agree: Income Inequality Increasing Robert Reich, Professor of Public Policy at U.S. Berkeley, argues that increased inequality has reduced overall aggregate demand noting that high-income households have a lower marginal propensity to consume (MPC) out of income than other households, and they're currently holding a bigger slice of the economic pie.Economists Atif Mian, Kamalesh Rao, and Amir Sufi confirm this, finding the MPC for households with an average annual income of less than $35,000 to be three times larger than households with average income over $200,000.Mian and Sufi also found that, as home values increased between 2002 and 2006, low-income households very aggressively borrowed and spent - while high-income households were less responsive.When housing wealth declined, spending cuts for low-income households was twice as large as that for rich ones.Mian and Sufi further used ZIP codes to locate areas with disproportionately large numbers of subprime borrowers (those with low incomes and credit ratings) and found that these ZIP codes experienced growth in borrowing between 2002 and 2005 that was more than twice as high as in ZIP codes with wealthy "prime" borrowers.After 2006, the subprime ZIP codes experienced an increase in default rates three times that of prime ZIP codes.Raghuram Rajan claims that, while high-income individuals saved, low-income individuals borrowed beyond their means in order to sustain their consumption, and that this overleveraging, as a result of increased inequality, was a significant cause of the financial crisis in 2008.An IMF paper by Michael Kumhof and Romain Ranciere confirms Rajan linking income distribution and financial excess suggests that these same factors were likely at play in both the Great Depression and Great Recession.Unfortunately, coming back from the Great Recession appears to be taking longer than many had hoped. With a post-recession annual growth rate of 2.2%, our recovery is not even half the historical average annual growth of 4.6% for other recoveries going back to This is not a complete surprise, given that financial crises are often followed by prolonged recessions and a long bout of subpar growth--thanks in part to the deleveraging that comes as people try to repair their finances.Source: S&P August 4, 2014 Economic Report: How Increasing Income Inequality Is Dampening U.S. Economic Growth
46The Post Global Recession Today:The Post Global RecessionThe weak Recovery
47Headwinds Holding Back the US Economy An anemic housing market,Continuing cuts in federal government spending, andWeaker global growth that reduced demand for American exports.The slowing growth in the size of the American labor force,Due to demographic factors like the retirement of baby boomers andWorkers who have given up looking for jobs i.e. unusable skill sets"The Great Recession--Moving Ahead,“ Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer
48Lost Jobs, Missing Workers, Stagnant Wages As of June 2014 the weak recovery from the recession:Number of jobs reached the previous peak of January 2008,Gains of more than 8.5 million jobs since early 2010.However, the working-age population has grown substantially in the last six years, andReliable estimates is at least seven million jobs below its potentialCosting hundreds of billions of dollars in lost output.More than four million people are still considered among the long-term unemployed,Out of work for at least half a year.Considerably dimmer prospects of finding another job as their skills deteriorate and their contact with the world of work fades.And that does not count the more than six million who have opted out of the labor force altogether, even taking into account demographic factors like the aging of the population.Source: NY Times “The Nation’s Economy, This Side of the Recession”
49For Many Americans, Not Much of a Recovery The richest Americans have generally recouped their losses from the recession and gained considerable new wealth during the recovery,The current situation is worse for the poor and for low-wage workers than it was in 2007,Jobs dried up and wages stagnated, tens of millions of Americans took jobs with lower pay and fewer hours,Many turned to the federal government for additional support to help make ends meet.The number of people receiving food stamps under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program soared to 47.6 million in 2013 from 26.3 million in 2007.Incomes for the typical middle-income family have slipped,The nation’s poverty rate remains above its prerecession level.
502007-09 Recession Recovery #1 reason for lack of job creation 4.18 Trillion currently in Cash Deposits and growing$2.58 Trillion sitting in US Banks (see FRED chart)Huge deposits began in 2009Before it was never more than $1 to $1.5 billion$1.6 Trillion corporate deposits in off-shore banksMostly to avoid US corporate taxes orAcquisitions of start-ups and competitorsSource: Federal Reserve Economic Data – St. Louis
51THE UPSHOT|How the Recession Reshaped the Economy, in 255 Charts (NY Times 8-6-14)
52Poverty is Now mainstream The Decline of Upward MobilityPoverty is Now mainstream
53Poverty and the US Economy Poverty rates decline from its high in 1959, on the upswing since 2005In 1969 the official government rate was 13.7%.In 1989 it was at 13.1%In 2009 with the slide of the middle class into poverty the rate was at 15%2011 the poverty rate for women in 2011 was 16.9% and for children over 20%.
54Poverty has become mainstream Nearly 40 % of Americans between the ages of 25 and 60 will experience at least one year below the official poverty line during that period ($23,492 for a family of four)54 % will spend a year in poverty or near poverty (below 150 %of the poverty line).If related conditions like welfare use, near-poverty and unemployment were added, four out of five Americans will encounter one or more of these events.Half of all American children will at some point during their childhood reside in a household that uses food stamps for a period of time.Source: Wall Street Journal
55Declining Upward Mobility What was once thought that over 80% of sons of fathers born in the US moved up the ladder, now it is far less, now 34% believe this.65 % born in the bottom fifth stay in the bottom two-fifths.Once it was thought that 20% of success was based upon family inheritance being passed from one generation to the next.Today studies have found that it is the other way around, inheritance is the basis for successThere is greater opportunity for upward mobility in many other countriesEducational and wage and mobility is greater in Denmark, Australia, Norway, Finland, Canada, Sweden and GermanySource: Oxfam Survey - Perception of Economic Mobility
56Starting from Bottom Fifth Upward mobility in the 50 largest metro areas comparing the top 10 and the bottom 10 areasRankLocationOdds of Reaching Top 5th Starting from Bottom Fifth1San Jose, CA12.90%41Cleveland, OH5.10%2San Francisco, CA12.20%42St. Louis, MO3Washington DC, DC11.00%43Raleigh, NC5.00%4Seattle, WA 10.90%44Jacksonville, FL4.90%5Salt Lake City, UT10.80%45Columbus, OH6New York, NY10.50%46Indianapolis, IN7Boston, MA47Dayton, OH8San Diego, CA10.40%48Atlanta, GA4.50%9Newark, NJ10.20%49Milwaukee, WI10Manchester, NH10.00%50Charlotte, NC4.40%Source: NBER-Where Is The Land Of Opportunity? The Geography Of Intergenerational Mobility In The United States
57Session 10: Seeking a New approach America’s Frayed Safety-NetStrategies for a solution to curb growing poverty in the USDraft White Paper DiscussionNation-wide Survey Questionnaire
58America’s Frayed Safety-Net SNAP: November 2013, food benefits were cut for approximately 48 million Americans by an average of 7 percent, costing the typical recipient about $9 a month.Unemployment Benefits: January 2014, 1.3 million jobless workers stop receiving an unemployment check, after Congress’s refusal to prolong the extension of emergency jobless benefits to up to 73 weeks, from 26. Perhaps as many as five million people will lose their benefit over the next year.Affordable Care Act. Despite its success of registering a significant number who did not have health care insurance in 2013, states and members of congress war against the program continues unabated. As of May states had not extended health care coverage in their states.Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Despite a decline of 60% in its case load since 1998, it is positioned as a disincentive to finding work.
60Monthly Participation in the SNAP food stamp program 1990-2012 actual and 2012-2020 projected
61Selected Anti-Poverty Strategies Center for American Progress: “Half in Ten” CampaignEconomic Policy InstituteNew American FoundationRyan’s Alternative Anti-poverty Strategy
62“Half in Ten” Campaign Child Care Food and Nutrition Education Health Success Stories:Child CareFood and NutritionEducationHealthHousingIncome AssistanceJobs trainingLow-income tax creditsWICUnemployment InsuranceMinimum wageCall to Action July 21, 2014 Re:New House Child Tax Credit Bill Leaves Behind Millions of Low-Income Working FamiliesWhile it permanently extends the Child Tax Credit higher up the income scale so more families with six-figure incomes will benefit. It fails to make permanent the 2009 reduction in the CTC’s earnings threshold, set to expire at the end of If this provision expires, a single mother with two children who works full time throughout the year at the minimum wage and earns $14,500 would lose her full CTC of $1,725 in 2018. It indexes the current maximum credit of $1,000 per child to inflation. This provision would not help most working families with low or moderate incomes, because it benefits only those with incomes high enough to receive the maximum credit.
63Economic Policy Institute (www.EPI.org) Issues Focus:Labor Laws – ExamplesExtend Unemployment Benefits - State Cuts to Jobless Benefits Tipped Workers and Minimum WageTax Credits –ExamplesThe Earned Income Tax CreditChild Tax CreditImmigration reform - ExampleOverloaded Immigration Courts
64New American Foundation Asset Building Program: issues and papersChildren's Savings AccountsSolving the Retirement PuzzleRebalancing the ScalesThe Financial Health CheckConnecting Tax Time to Financial SecurityCalifornia Civic Innovation Project technology to influence local government“Public Pathways: A Guide to Online Engagement Tools for Local GovernmentsEconomic Growth Program research papers such as:The Wizard of Jobs a US labor status report on the first 6 months of 2014 and its continued jobs slump.America's Debt Problem discusses the impact on middle and low income classes due to excessive private debt and its consequences.Pay More, Get Less that takes a look at the cost of health, medical, education, basic financial services and communications
65Tax Reform Strategies Background Simplification and Tax Reform MeasuresReform of the Tax Expenditure System
66Tax Reform - Background Last overhauled of the federal tax code: 1986Tax Cuts, i.e. lowering of capital gains to 15% have benefited the wealthy, howeverMiddle and Low Income have been hit by increased “payroll” taxesTax reform is the best way to tackle “income inequality”One tax reform strategy: raising taxes on high-income earners and corporations to pay for expanded benefits to low-income Americans.Second alternative: classic tax reform of “broaden the base, lower the rates.”The complexity of the tax code has gotten far out of hand:The code is now nearly 74,000 pages long. That's about 185 times longer than it was in 1913, when the code was 400 pages.Since 2001 there have been nearly 5,000 changes made to the code.These changes along with the complexity require 6 billion hours a year to comply.
67Tax Reform and Simplification Three recommendations for reform and simplification:National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform Simpson-Bowles 6 Part Budget PlanUrban and Brookings Institute Tax Policy CenterUS Senate Committee on Finance Tax Reform ListReform of The Distribution of Major Tax Expenditures in the Individual Income Tax SystemThe Simpson-Bowles 6 part plan has a lot of good ideas for tax and budget reform, they go hand in hand. But, because of extreme partisanship, its recommendations has gone no where.The best source to look at the need for budget reform and where it should be targeted is the Tax Policy Center of the Urban and Brookings Institutes
68Please visit our Blog Site: Decline of the US Middle Class, America’s New Working Poor
69Learning Communities Resource Center Contacts Barbara Ledyard – Project Director, Learning Communities Resource CenterDenise Harlow – Senior Director, Training and Technical AssistanceSonji Dawson Johnson – Program SpecialistCashin Yiu – Program and Event CoordinatorThis publication was created by the National Association of Community Action Agencies – Community Action Partnership, in the performance of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Office of Community Services Grant Number 90ET0436. Any opinion, findings, and conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families.