Posts tagged ‘Jobs’

New Study Shows that Corporate Tax Cuts Won’t Create Jobs


New Study Shows that Corporate Tax Cuts Won’t Create Jobs

BY OLIVIA SANDBOTHE  |  DECEMBER 18, 2013

There’s no correlation between low taxes and job creation.

That’s the finding in a new report from the Center for Effective Government that refutes corporate CEOs, bankers and tea party members of Congress who engage in some serious magical thinking when it comes to taxes and job creation.

We’ve heard these voodoo economics before: cut taxes and jobs will appear.  Right now,corporate tax rates are at their lowest point in 40 years even as profits soar.  Meanwhile, our economy is still struggling. It’s about time we questioned why these policies have yet to result in the job growth that their proponents predicted. 

In the new study, The Center for Effective Government, a nonprofit group that studies the economic impact of public policy, analyzed the Fortune 500 companies that posted profits between 2008 and 2012. Then it compared the job numbers of the companies that paid the highest tax rates to those of the companies that paid the fewest taxes.  

Of the 30 companies that paid more than a third of their profits in taxes, all but eight added jobs between 2008 and 2010. As a group, these companies reported a net gain of more than 200,000 US jobs.

Compare that to the 30 corporations that paid the lowest rates.  Many of these firms are paying no federal income taxes at all.  Even as this group raked in $159 billion in profits, only half of them added any jobs.  In total, they cut more jobs than they added, for a net result of 51,000 jobs lost. 

These numbers tell a story that many of us already knew.  Corporations don’t seek out lower tax rates because they’re eager to start hiring.  They do it to boost profits, and they don’t intend to share those profits with the rest of us.

What it all means is that billions of dollars that could be spent on education and infrastructure that benefits everyone are instead being hoarded by corporate CEOs.  The Center for Effective Government estimates that we could raise $220 billion simply by closing tax loopholes that allow corporations to hide money overseas.  Raising the federal corporate tax rate by only a few percentage points would be even more effective.

Public opinion is starting to turn against trickle-down economics.  Even Pope Francis has come out against the idea. It’s time to use that momentum to push for a tax system that benefits everyone instead of one that chases after imaginary job growth at the expense of our public programs.

You can read the entire CEG report by clicking here.

Advertisements

1,OOO,OOO NEW PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS IN FLORIDA WITHOUT SUBSIDIES, TAX BREAKS OR GIVEAWAY – PART TWO Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/1oooooo-new-private-sector-jobs-in-florida-without-subsidies-tax-breaks-or-giveaway-part-two/#U0kbWF3v02439zQt.99


1,OOO,OOO NEW PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS IN FLORIDA WITHOUT SUBSIDIES, TAX BREAKS OR GIVEAWAY – PART TWO Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/1oooooo-new-private-sector-jobs-in-florida-without-subsidies-tax-breaks-or-giveaway-part-two/#U0kbWF3v02439zQt.99

by Farid A. Khavari

Khavari Job Creation Plan, Part 2.

As governor, here’s exactly how I will create 1,000,000 good middle class jobs in Florida, without subsidies, tax incentives or other corporate socialism. It’s simple.

A governor with an economic plan is in a unique position to create jobs in Florida without subsidies, “stimulus plans”, or other forms of corporate socialism.  When you see how this goes, you will understand that it will work like magic, and you will wonder why every governor doesn’t do it.  That’s because this is common sense economics, not politics. And it involves working for the people of Florida, not the special interests.

You have heard about “Supply” and “Demand”.  Here is why corporate socialism and stimulus plans fail to create jobs:  they focus on supply. For example, Solyndra blew $535 million to create and then lose less than 2,000 jobs, and our grandchildren will still be paying the interest on that. They made a great factory to produce something that apparently no one wanted. Oops!

 

Become Inspired To Give. Watch Now.

 

Anyone but a politician can understand that a business will hire people when there is a demand for its products and services, and it will lay off people when there is no demand.  What I will do as governor, and it costs virtually nothing to do, is organizedemand.

As governor, I will represent all 19 million plus Floridians.  While we are all individuals, we have many common interests and acting together we are a huge economic force because we are a huge market. By representing all Floridians, a governor is in a unique position to drive the economy by organizing demand.   Here is one simple example.

Here’s a sample phone call from the governor’s office in January, 2015.

Governor Khavari:   Hey, Solar Panel Manufacturer, we have started a new program to solarize Florida. We have about 10 million homes, and we figure that 5,000,000 of them will get solar water heaters over the next few years. Our program is voluntary but we are promoting it because it can save people five times what it costs and we are all about reducing costs.  We are arranging special pricing with manufacturers so we can have the best deal possible for our people. We have arranged special financing so that people can get solar and pay for it through the energy savings.  We have licensed qualified plumbers and installers all over the state getting special training seminars. We need product.

Solar Panel Manufacturer:  That sounds interesting.

Governor Khavari:   We assure the manufacturers that a certain amount of their products will be sold in Florida at a pre-determined wholesale price, if they make them in Florida and hire Floridians. The pricing allows you to pay middle class wages and benefits and we need that, too.  Can you make 100,000 solar collectors per year in Florida?  How many can you promise us?  And how many jobs?

Solar Panel Manufacturer:   We can only supply 50,000 in the first year but 100,000 in the second year and onward.  We would need to hire 200 people the first year, and say 200 more the second year.  I know Florida has great roads, railroads, and ports so I’m sure we’ll find a location or two right away.  If we can sell that quantity at our current wholesale prices, we can pay better than the average wage; say around $44,000 and good benefits.

Governor Khavari:  Show up at my office on Tuesday and bring a pen.  We want this up and running within 90 days.  Our staff has arranged for representatives from cities and counties around Florida to meet with you and other manufacturers here so you can see what location makes sense for you.  One condition though, you can’t accept local tax benefits or handouts.

Solar Panel Manufacturer:   You don’t get jobs with handouts, sir; you get jobs when there is demand. What time on Tuesday?

Repeat this phone call to a few dozen manufacturers of various components of solar water heaters, and at the end of the day you have 3,000 manufacturing jobs which will grow to 7,000 within two years.  That’s nice for a number of areas who get these jobs.  But the real benefit is that this program creates over 30,000 MORE equally-well paying jobs all throughout Floridabecause every one of those systems needs to be sold, installed and maintained.

I described “SuperJobs” in the last post.  A SuperJob is a job which creates more wealth than an ordinary job, because the products or services pay for themselves and then provide permanent cost savings to the customer.  In the case of a solar water heater at the right price, the product pays for itself with energy savings, and then goes on to pay for itself four or five times over time.  Even though our “Solarize Florida” is voluntary, we will need a lottery to decide who gets these systems because demand will outstrip supply for a year or two.

We can have over 33,000 good jobs just from this little deal.  Now there is something else to consider:  33,000 good middle class jobs represent almost $2 billion per year of income. That translates into at least $10 billion per year in economic activity as that income circulates.  This added $10 billion in economic activity will create 100,000 more jobs in Florida within two years.  And those 100,000 jobs will create more. And so on.

This is just one small example of how I will create 1,000,000 good middle class jobs in Florida.  You can see how simple it is.  The special financing costs taxpayers nothing, either from local banks who want to enjoy some of the state’s banking deposits, or from my proposed SuperBank.  The manufacturers pay their own way and reap the benefits of a strong market.  They even pay for the training seminars.  The customers get a great product at the lowest possible prices. The solar companies and plumbers make a fair profit while paying the middle class wages and benefits required to participate in our program.

Next time I will explain how we can create a much larger number of SuperJobs in Florida and save billions in the state’s budget, too.

Rick Scott has promised to spend $100 million to win another term as chief lapdog of big money special interests.  (Who is paying for that, and why?) Charlie Crist has already raised millions from big donors.  There is only one way to defeat big money and the special interests pulling the strings in Florida, and that is by using social media to get the message out to every voter.  Please pass these posts to everyone you know and get the word out!

If you don’t need a job, you certainly know someone who does.  Stand up to big money! Pass it on!

Khavari for Governor, Florida 2014. A million good jobs.  Really.

 

Farid Khavari, Ph.D., economist is a candidate for Florida Governor 2014.

 

Read more at http://investmentwatchblog.com/1oooooo-new-private-sector-jobs-in-florida-without-subsidies-tax-breaks-or-giveaway-part-two/#U0kbWF3v02439zQt.99

Census Bureau clarifies poverty numbers – U.S. News


Census Bureau clarifies poverty numbers – U.S. News.

Officials at the U.S. Census Bureau moved Friday to clarify widely reported figures meant to estimate the number of Americans living in poverty.

Dueling Census reports – one based on official poverty estimates that was released just last week and another based on an experimental calculus used in November – differed from one another by 20 percentage points regarding the number of people viewed as living in poverty. The widely reported figure showed that one out of two Americans are in poverty or are low-income. Other Census figures put the figure closer to one out of three Americans.
Advertise | AdChoices

That’s because the experimental measure, a supplement to the official poverty figures meant to take into account such factors as whether a family is receiving food stamps and how much people pay in taxes, uses a poverty level of $24,343 for a family of four instead of the $21,113 used by the official measure.

Read the original story on NBCLosAngeles.com

In expensive states like California and New York, the supplemental measure classified families making as much as $32,869 as impoverished.

However, Kathleen Short, the Census Bureau economist who spearheaded the supplemental report, said it would be wrong to extrapolate from those numbers that Americans are falling into poverty at greater rates.

In fact, she said, the experimental calculation indicated that poverty among children is actually lower than the official poverty rate shows.

On Thursday, reports in multiple news outlets suggested that people making roughly twice the poverty level under the experimental program were “scraping by” and should be considered low-income.

The Census Bureau does not support that interpretation of the data, Short said.

“Below 200 percent of the poverty threshold is the lower end of the distribution,” Short said. “But we would not call it low-income per se.”

A number of news reports on Thursday correctly said that more people fell under the definition of living in poverty under the experimental calculation, but then went on to say that people making twice that would be considered low-income.

However, the practice of using such figures as “150 percent of poverty” or “200 percent of poverty” to determine whether people were of moderate or low income is a practice that grew up around the older, traditional method of identifying poverty, which uses a lower threshold.

More from NBC4 on the Census reports: Assessing poverty

In parts of California under the supplemental approach, a family that owns its own home and earns about $66,000 per year would be earning 200 percent of the poverty level, and not necessarily be considered low-income.
Advertise | AdChoices

NBC4, relying on figures and analysis from the Los Angeles office of the Census, reported the newer, official poverty figures on Thursday, and questioned reports that used the supplemental figures.

A widely distributed news story by the Associated Press (and published by msnbc.com) relied on the supplemental report.

“We did not misunderstand the data,” AP spokesman Jack Stokes said in an email. “The AP story was vetted by the Census Bureau in Washington.”

However, Short said that she did not agree with the news service’s conclusion that the report showed one out of two Americans to be low-income or impoverished.

Short stressed that the supplemental measure was a work in progress, and that it should not be considered a replacement for the official poverty rate.

The AP’s calculations were correct, Short said, “but I’m not agreeing with any adjectives that are placed on being in that category.”

“In fact we stressed the Census Bureau does not have a definition for low income.” Short said

In the supplemental report, “we’re not characterizing what it’s like to be below 200 percent of the poverty line,” Short said. “We don’t have any information to characterize what that would be like.”

Follow NBCLA for the latest LA news, events and entertainment: Twitter: @NBCLA// Facebook: NBCLA

More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:

Romney’s missing hard drives raise questions
Lingering shortage of ADHD drugs unravels lives
Buyer found for priciest bank-owned home
Reporter’s notebook: Return to Cuba

Obama hits China on trade and Romney on China | The Ticket – Yahoo! News


Obama hits China on trade and Romney on China | The Ticket – Yahoo! News.

Campaigning Monday in the pivotal battleground of Ohio, President Barack Obama hit China over allegedly underhanded competition that hurts American workers, and knocked Mitt Romney as being for unfair trade practices before he was against them.
Equality Armando Olmos

You read this

“We don’t need folks who during election time suddenly are worrying about trade practices, but before the election are taking advantage of unfair trading practices,” Obama told a crowd of some 4,500 cheering supporters in Cincinnati.

The Republican presidential nominee has recently redoubled his attacks on the president over China as both men court blue-collar workers who blame Beijing’s rise for the decline of American manufacturing. It’s a sentiment with overwhelming support in Congress, where many accuse the rising economic power of keeping its currency artificially low against the dollar—a move that helps keep its exports cheaper relative to American competition.

The former Massachusetts governor has promised that, if elected, he will formally designate China a currency manipulator, a step that could trigger retaliatory sanctions—and, many experts warn, precipitate a trade war.

Obama, who has sometimes struggled to reach white working-class voters, accused Romney of benefiting personally from seeing American manufacturing jobs flow to China. The president charged that, as head of the private equity firm Bain Capital, his rival invested in firms that moved jobs to Asia.

“He made money investing in companies that uprooted from here and went to China,” Obama said. “Now, Ohio, you can’t stand up to China when all you’ve done is sent them our jobs.”

The Romney campaign vigorously disputed that allegation, with spokesman Ryan Williams accusing the president of “recycling false and debunked attacks.”

“He can’t tell the people of Ohio about his record of fewer jobs, more debt, and lower incomes,” Williams said in a statement. “And even members of his own party have loudly condemned his inaction toward China.”

(The Republican National Committee also blasted out a series of quotes from Democrats, including Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown, which had criticized the Obama administration for not designating China a currency manipulator. Obama aides say the yuan is artificially cheap, but that the issue is best addressed either at the World Trade Organization or through bilateral negotiations—even though such talks have yielded little progress. Legislation meant to escalate the pressure on Beijing has stalled in the Republican-held House of Representatives in the face of opposition from potent sectors of big business.)

Obama’s trip came as the U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk announced new steps to challenge China’s allegedly improper subsidies to its auto and auto-parts sectors.

The Obama administration is also escalating another trade enforcement action, begun in July, against what it says are unfair anti-dumping and countervailing duties on some $3.3 billion in U.S. automobile exports to China.

“You can talk a good game, but I like to walk the walk, not just talk the talk,” Obama said.

Romney’s tough rhetoric on China reflects how a challenger can use foreign policy issues to his or her advantage: Candidate Obama did the same thing on China in 2008, pushing then-President George W. Bush to boycott the Beijing Olympics. In 2000, candidate Bush hit the Clinton administration’s record on China and described the rising Asian power as a strategic competitor. And in 1992, candidate Bill Clinton accused then-President George H.W. Bush of accommodating the “butchers of Beijing.”

Each time, the candidate turned president muted his more strident criticisms and worked to bring Beijing into international institutions and get its cooperation on a range of thorny issues, like nuclear programs in North Korea and Iran. Advisers to Romney insist that he would keep his pledge.
Explore Related Content
1 – 4 of 20

U.S. Republican presidential nominee and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney pauses as speaks to reporters in Los Angeles, California

U.S. Republican presidential nominee …

Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney addresses the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce in Los Angeles, Monday, Sept. 17, 2012. (AP Photo/David McNew)

Republican presidential candidate and …

Presidential Hopeful Mitt Romney Speaks To Hispanic Business Owners

Presidential Hopeful Mitt Romney Speaks …

U.S. Republican presidential nominee and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney addresses the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce in Los Angeles, California

U.S. Republican presidential nominee …

How Many Jobs Are Needed to Keep Up with Population Growth? | The Economic Populist


How Many Jobs Are Needed to Keep Up with Population Growth? | The Economic Populist.

The press quotes all sorts of figures for the number of monthly job gains needed to keep up with population growth. We see numbers like 80,000, 100,000, 125,000 and 175,000 thrown around like statistical snow as the number of jobs needed each month just to keep up. What’s the right one? How many jobs are needed each month just to keep up with population growth?

The actual monthly amount can be calculated and the Atlanta Fed even did us a huge favor by publishing an interactive monthly jobs calculator so you can go check for yourself. This month shows we need 104,116 payroll jobs to maintain the same unemployment rate of 8.1% with all of the other same terrible conditions the state of employment is in.

That’s the key, the current terrible conditions the state of employment is in today. One of the reasons the number of jobs to keep up with population growth is so low is due to so many having dropped out of the labor force. If we had more people being counted as needing a job, the number of jobs to keep up with population growth would be much higher.

To explain this, we need to go to BLS school and learn some labor concepts. The employment universe comes from the civilian noninstitutional population. These are people in the United States, aged 16 and over, who aren’t in the military, infirmed or locked up somewhere.

blsconcept1

The above pie chart shows how the civilian nonstitutional population is divided up into two classifications, either you’re in the civilian labor force, or you’re not. The employment statistics come from the civilian labor force. Those who are classified as not in the labor force are not counted, and thus not considered as needing a job or mattering when their numbers swell.

blsconcept2

The civilian labor force is then divided up into two categories, either you have a job or you don’t. In the unemployed category, you have to be actively looking to be considered as part of the civilian labor force. The above pie chart shows the breakdown, using the August 2012 statistics.

The civilian noninstitutional population grows every month and for 2011, the average was 0.059% per month. For the last 12 months, the average was 0.128% per month, so the population growth varies, but there is a huge problem. The woe is the Census puts their annual benchmark adjustments in the month of January only. The benchmark adjustments are not annually smoothed or averaged in on a month to month basis. This makes the monthly population percentage growth more difficult to estimate, for we have a fudge factor plopped in between the December and January estimates. We can see the annual benchmarks, or fudge factor, in the below graph showing the monthly change in civilian noninstitutional population.

Civilian population change

What we can do is ignore the months of January and take the average growth rate for the last year, bypassing the benchmark weirdness month. Doing this gives a monthly growth rate of 0.0762% for noninstitutional civilian population and thus we smooth away those benchmarks to get a much more realistic average population growth rate.

If the fact that the benchmark adjustments are not evenly distributed across the monthly change in noninstitutional civilian population isn’t enough to throw a monkey wrench into figuring out how many jobs we need each month just to keep up, we have an additional problem. There are people who really are not in the labor force and these percentages change. The population is getting older, we have more retirees and unfortunately we put people in prison more than any other industrialized nation. Then, other people are not part of the labor force because they have been unemployed so long they are no longer counted. In other words, we cannot say that all of the growth of those not in the labor force is due to people dropping off of the unemployed statistical radar. That said, clearly many are. Where we can see this most is in the labor participation rate. The labor participation rate is the ratio of the civilian labor force to those not in the labor force. The below graph shows we are at record lows in the ratio of those as part of the labor force to those who are not.

If we take the labor participation rate at the start of the great recession, 66%, we get a whole other number of jobs needed each month to keep up with population growth. If we keep the same rate of unemployment, 8.1%, we would need 545,551 jobs per month and it would take an entire year to get to the same August rate of unemployment, 8.1%.

This is because by increasing the labor participation rate 2.5%, we took 6,089,150 people not counted and added them to the labor force statistics and of course, they would enter in as unemployed. The unemployment rate is the ratio of those in the civilian labor force who do not have a job against those who who do.

We can also estimate the number of jobs needed each month, just to maintain, by rough numbers. If we assume a smoothed noninstitutional civilian population growth rate of 0.076% per month, then next month’s population growth would be 185,617 additional people ages 16 and over and not locked up somewhere. If we then assume the labor participation rate of this new growth would be 68.0% and not the actual, artificially low 63.5%, we would get an additional 126,920 jobs needed to keep up with this population growth.

This is much more realistic for new population growth is probably going to enter the labor force looking for a job. The BLS counts illegal immigrants, green card holders and foreign guest workers in their statistics and most of the population growth is due to immigration. These people either already have a job upon entering the country, or are going to want one fast. Bottom line, yes Virginia, increased immigration does affect labor markets, all else being static. I do believe to say our economic growth and thus labor demand is static at the moment is not an understatement.

Check out the Atlanta Federal Reserve jobs calculator. It’s Economic Populist approved, we checked their arithmetic and assumptions.

If this is not enough to convince you, we suggest reading this article, this or this one for more background.

Finally our favorite and never reported BLS statistic amplifies the terrible situation for labor in this country. The BLS surveys people considered not part of the labor force and asks if they want a job right now. Below is a graph of the people who said yes and watch how this figure swells.

For August 2012, those not counted in the labor force but report they actually want and need a job increased by 403,000 in a month. That, folks, should have you horrified. Literally we have desperate and destitute people falling through the statistical crevasse, into the abyss where they can only shout out from the numerical darkness, yes I want a job!
BLS Employment Report Shows 96,000 Jobs and an Unemployment Rate of 8.1% for August 2012 ›

Add new comment
4849 reads
Share this

Syndicate content

Clinton: Over Last 50 Years, Two-Thirds Of Private Sector Job Growth Came Under Democratic Presidents


Clinton: Over Last 50 Years, Two-Thirds Of Private Sector Job Growth Came Under Democratic Presidents.

Former President Bill Clinton poured cold water on the Republican Party’s jobs rhetoric last night in a speech at the Democratic National Convention, telling the nation that in the 50 years since John F. Kennedy took office, the vast majority of private sector jobs have been created under Democratic administrations. In those 52 years, as Bloomberg reported in May, 42 million of the new private sector jobs were created during 24 years of Democratic presidencies versus just 24 million under Republicans.

Clinton highlighted the statistic last night as evidence that the Republican vision for the economy, which ignores that “poverty, discrimination, and ignorance restrict growth,” won’t provide the recovery the American economy needs:

CLINTON: Well, since 1961, for 52 years now, the Republicans have held the White House 28 years, the Democrats 24. In those 52 years, our private economy has produced 66 million private sector jobs. So, what’s the job score? Republicans, 24 million, Democrats, 42 (million). Now, there’s a reason for this. It turns out that advancing equal opportunity and economic empowerment is both morally right and good economics. Why? Because poverty, discrimination, and ignorance restrict growth. When you stifle human potential, when you don’t invest in new ideas, it doesn’t just cut off the people who are affected, it hurts us all.

Watch it:

The GOP’s supply-side economic policies, which rely on tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, have failed to boost economic growth for more than three decades, a point Clinton made while hammering Republican nominee Mitt Romney’s plan to push through a tax cut four times the size of George W. Bush’s. “We simply can’t afford to give the reins of government to someone who will double down on trickle down,” Clinton said.

Clinton isn’t alone in analyzing the GOP’s economic failures: in July, 40 economists looked at the Republican Party’s plans and determined that it had abandoned economic reality. During the GOP primaries, economic professors said the party’s plans couldn’t pass a basic economics class.

Eva M. Clayton: A 2012 Farm Bill That Support Small Farmers and Nutritional Assistance Programs: Good for Our Nation’s Health and Economy


 

In Friday’s Los Angeles Times, there was an opinion editorial titled “America Needs a Farm Bill That Works” — this title is precisely why I think members of Congress need to be committed to pushing forward a bipartisan piece of legislation.

A 2012 Farm Bill will help provide infrastructure, investment and economic certainty for American agriculture — things that are both important and critical for an industry that impacts all Americans, whether they live in big cities or small rural communities. But in order for the bill to be effective in providing these things, it must support small farmers and nutritional programs that are key components to the viability and health of an Agriculture economy.
Small farmers are often made the loving poster child of our rural landscape. They are a struggling, declining and aging population. According to the Economic Research Services in United States Department of Agriculture, during the last census there were over 2.1 million farms in the U.S., of which 75% earned less than $50,000 annually and had about 5% production while the very large farms, representing just 2% of all farms, made over $1 million dollars and had 47% production.
This is a problem when you consider small farmers generally produce more fruits, vegetables, nuts and sustainable food products, all of which are essential for proper nutritional sustenance. As our country continues to focus on the importance of a balanced and nutritious diet, Congress should focus on ensuring competitive opportunities for small farmers that will enable them to continue to grow the healthy food that we need. Hopefully, obesity and other health issues can be addressed through healthy food choices. Local farmers are key to producing healthy foods and it will also increase their income.
Similar to the focus that is put on educating students in science and math to fill voids in those growing fields, Congress should support programs to recruit future farmers and ensure a growing and diverse industry in the future. The average U.S. farmer is 57 years old and just 5% of all farmers are 35 years or younger. Not to mention, just 4.6% of all U.S. farms are minority-owned and run. To say that there is room for improvement would be a gross understatement — we need to find creative ways attract new entrepreneurial and innovative farmers from all demographics. Congress and the present Administration recently addressed the lingering discrimination cases initiated by black farmers. However, constant vigilance is required to overcome the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) history of discrimination and to ensure equity for all farmers.
Additionally, upon examination of the payments to large farmers as compared to small farmers, the difference is vast. The commodity payments are tied to the production of specific commodities. These payments go primarily to large commercial producers. As a result, few of the smallest farms receive commodity payments.
In the 2008 farm bill, Congress did institute a number of new initiatives and expand other initiatives that encouraged local farmers to grow and sell food to various local vendors, including local school systems. For instance, in North Carolina, citizens are encouraged to buy locally and various grocery store chains, military bases and local schools are encouraged to purchase from local farmers. As a result, the local farm economy is benefiting and healthy foods are more accessible. We need to identify and expand smart and effective programs like this.
We also need to look for areas where we can improve. For example, the nutritional assistance programs under the farm bill are large and expensive and given the economic recovery, needed now more than ever. In September 2011, the USDA’s Economic Research Service reported that about one in every four Americans participates in at least one of the 15 domestic food and nutrition assistance programs of the USDA. These programs provide a nutritional safety net for millions of children and low-income adults. These programs also represent a significant federal investment, accounting for over two-thirds of USDA’s budget. A Moody’s study on the president’s stimulus impact noted that for every Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) dollar spent, it generated a $1.73 ripple effect in the economy.
The House Budget Committee, in an effort to reduce the federal budget deficit, proposed to cut SNAP significantly, possibly to its pre-2008 status — this is pennywise and pound foolish. This is not to suggest that there could not or should not be some reduction given to efficiency monitoring and other infrastructure upgrades. In addition to required financial resources, there needs to be greater use of Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards at farmers’ and fish markets where healthy foods are sold. Nutrition education is essential and should be integrated into each of the 15 food assistance programs.
Food security is generally recognized as an important goal for our country. Supporting good nutrition for our needy citizens is the right and moral action for our government to take, but it is also the economically and healthy action to take where small farmers will make a significant impact.

Follow Eva M. Clayton on Twitter: www.twitter.com/evamclayton

FOLLOW FOOD

Like

 

16k

 

Get Alerts

Related News On Huffington Post:

Soda And Obesity: Lautenberg Introduces Farm Bill Amendment Requiring Feds To Study Link

Does soda seriously, truly, without a doubt make people fat? Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) hopes to settle the question once and for all. On…

Ron Wyden Introduces Industrial Hemp Amendment To Farm Bill

Senator Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) on Thursday introduced an amendment to the farm bill that would allow farmers to grow industrial hemp. The amendment, S.3240, would…

Farm Bill Clears First Hurdle In Senate

WASHINGTON — A five-year farm and food bill that would revamp the federal safety net for farmers and eliminate direct government payments for idle crop…

Kirsten Gillibrand Makes Emotional Plea To Preserve Food Stamps

WASHINGTON — Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand took to the Senate floor Wednesday in an emotional bid to stave off $4.5 billion in cuts to programs that…

More News Posts:  « First   Prev  1  2 Next Last »

Soda And Obesity: Lautenberg Introduces Farm Bill Amendment Requiring Feds To Study Link Ron Wyden Introduces Industrial Hemp Amendment To Farm Bill Farm Bill Clears First Hurdle In Senate Kirsten Gillibrand Makes Emotional Plea To Preserve Food Stamps Monsanto DroughtGard Corn ‘Doesn’t Outperform’ Non-GMO Alternatives, Report Claims Bitter Senate Primaries Undercut GOP Hopes In 3 States Mario Batali Food Stamp Challenge: Chef Spending $31 On Food For One Week

Soda And Obesity: Lautenberg Introduces Farm Bill Amendment Requiring Feds To Study Link

Does soda seriously, truly, without a doubt make people fat? Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) hopes to settle the question once and for all. On…

Ron Wyden Introduces Industrial Hemp Amendment To Farm Bill

Senator Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) on Thursday introduced an amendment to the farm bill that would allow farmers to grow industrial hemp. The amendment, S.3240, would…

Farm Bill Clears First Hurdle In Senate

WASHINGTON — A five-year farm and food bill that would revamp the federal safety net for farmers and eliminate direct government payments for idle crop…

Kirsten Gillibrand Makes Emotional Plea To Preserve Food Stamps

WASHINGTON — Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand took to the Senate floor Wednesday in an emotional bid to stave off $4.5 billion in cuts to programs that…

Monsanto DroughtGard Corn ‘Doesn’t Outperform’ Non-GMO Alternatives, Report Claims

* Report challenges effectiveness of Monsanto corn * Says no improved water efficiency * Monsanto says new corn mitigates risk of yield loss in drought…

Bitter Senate Primaries Undercut GOP Hopes In 3 States

TAMPA, Fla. — Mutual admiration was the rule for Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson’s listening session at the University of South Florida. School provost Ralph Wilcox…

Mario Batali Food Stamp Challenge: Chef Spending $31 On Food For One Week

NEW YORK — To much of the world, it was Monday. To Mario Batali, it was Day Four. The chef, his wife and their two…

Read more from Huffington Post bloggers:

John RobbinsJohn Robbins: Why Are Twinkies Cheaper Than Carrots?Wenonah HauterWenonah Hauter: Governor Canoodling With Agribusiness? What You Can Do About ItSen. Kirsten GillibrandSen. Kirsten Gillibrand: The Farm Bill Should Protect Hungry Kids, Not Subsidies for Insurance CompaniesMario BataliMargarette PurvisMario Batali and Margarette Purvis: Believe It or Not, You Need Food StampsRuth MessingerRuth Messinger: Our Current Global Food Crisis and How We Can Feed 17 Million More PeopleLiz NeumarkLiz Neumark: Littlest VoicesVicki B. EscarraVicki B. Escarra: When We Feed Children, We Feed Our Future

John Robbins

John Robbins: Why Are Twinkies Cheaper Than Carrots?

If you want to eat healthfully, you have to fight an uphill battle. Why are government subsidies pushing in the wrong direction?

Wenonah Hauter

Wenonah Hauter: Governor Canoodling With Agribusiness? What You Can Do About It

If you ever thought that the farm bill was just about agricultural subsidies and food stamps, think again. Not only does the farm bill dictate what we eat — it also establishes whom our nation’s leaders are listening to on issues far beyond food.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand: The Farm Bill Should Protect Hungry Kids, Not Subsidies for Insurance Companies

The fact is that food stamps are an effective investment. For every dollar that’s invested into the SNAP program, we get $1.71 back in return.

Mario Batali
Margarette Purvis

Mario Batali and Margarette Purvis: Believe It or Not, You Need Food Stamps

Living within a food stamp budget for one week was a challenge for both of us, but that challenge has ended. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for millions of others.

Ruth Messinger

Ruth Messinger: Our Current Global Food Crisis and How We Can Feed 17 Million More People

This year during Shavuot, the Jewish holiday which marks the end of the harvest, I am reminded of my commitment to alleviate hunger.

Liz Neumark

Liz Neumark: Littlest Voices

That is the story of our garden and our lives — open mouths (and minds) looking for something sustaining to eat.

Vicki B. Escarra

Vicki B. Escarra: When We Feed Children, We Feed Our Future

There are 16 million children in the United States who are facing hunger. How many of those kids live in your community? How many…

Wenonah Hauter

Wenonah Hauter: Governor Canoodling With Agribusiness? What You Can Do About It

If you ever thought that the farm bill was just about agricultural subsidies and food stamps, think again. Not only does the farm bill dictate what we eat — it also establishes whom our nation’s leaders are listening to on issues far beyond food.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand: The Farm Bill Should Protect Hungry Kids, Not Subsidies for Insurance Companies

The fact is that food stamps are an effective investment. For every dollar that’s invested into the SNAP program, we get $1.71 back in return.

Mario Batali
Margarette Purvis

Mario Batali and Margarette Purvis: Believe It or Not, You Need Food Stamps

Living within a food stamp budget for one week was a challenge for both of us, but that challenge has ended. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for millions of others.

Ruth Messinger

Ruth Messinger: Our Current Global Food Crisis and How We Can Feed 17 Million More People

This year during Shavuot, the Jewish holiday which marks the end of the harvest, I am reminded of my commitment to alleviate hunger.

More Blog Posts:  « First   Prev  1  2 Next Last »

More in Food…

Spider Found In Chef Boyardee Beef Ravioli,…

Fast Food Lobster Rolls

Chain Food Showdown: The Best & Worst…

Review: Burger King Bacon Sundae

  • Comments
  • 1
  • Pending Comments
  • 1
  • View FAQ

Eva M. Clayton: A 2012 Farm Bill That Support Small Farmers and Nutritional Assistance Programs: Good for Our Nation’s Health and Economy