Editorial
Poverty and Recovery
Published: January 18, 2011
In 2008, the first year of the Great Recession, the number of Americans living in poverty rose by 1.7 million to nearly 47.5 million. While hugely painful, that rise wasn’t surprising given the unraveling economy. What is surprising is that recent census data show that those poverty numbers held steady in 2009, even though job loss worsened significantly that year.
Clearly, the sheer scale of poverty — 15.7 percent of the country’s population — is unacceptable. But to keep millions more Americans from falling into poverty during a deep recession is a genuine accomplishment that holds a vital lesson: the safety net, fortified by stimulus, staved off an even more damaging crisis.
Congress should take a good look at those numbers, and consider that lesson carefully, before it commits to any more slashing and burning.
The latest poverty figures are from the census “alternative” data, developed in the 1990s to count income and expenses that the “official” data omit. For example, the official measure counts only cash income to gauge poverty (defined as $21,756 for a family of four in 2009). The alternative figures cited above, which closely follow criteria from the National Academy of Sciences, include noncash federal benefits, like food stamps (and set the poverty line at $24,522 for a family of four). That gives a truer picture of a family’s economic status.
What analysts have found is that the antipoverty effect of government intervention in 2009 was profound. Calculations by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal-leaning research group, show that specific stimulus provisions — including expanded federal jobless benefits, new and improved tax credits for workers and bolstered food stamps — kept 4.5 million people out of poverty in 2009. Only Social Security and the earned income credit did more to fight poverty.
The results are likely to be roughly similar in 2010 because most of the 2009 law was continued last year. The portents going forward are not good.
Federal aid is being scaled back, even though growth is not yet robust enough to make a sizable dent in unemployment. Late last year, Republicans blocked the extension of a successful stimulus program that had created 250,000 subsidized jobs for young people and low-income parents. They claimed the stimulus was an expensive failure, even as they pressed to renew the high-end Bush tax cuts. As part of the tax-cut deal, President Obama and Congress agreed to extend federal jobless benefits in 2011, but the checks will be $25 less a week than under the stimulus. That reduction could push an estimated 175,000 more people into poverty in 2011. The deal also included a one-year payroll tax cut that will benefit most workers, but it is less helpful to the lowest-income workers than a now-expired tax break in the stimulus.
With 14.5 million people still out of work, and more than 6 million of them jobless for more than six months, reducing federal help now will almost ensure more poverty later. That would impose an even higher cost on the economy and budget because ever poorer households cannot spend and consume.
We know it goes against the prevailing rhetoric to argue that more and better government policies are still needed to repair the economy. It is also unpopular to argue that programs that have succeeded for decades in reducing poverty, like Social Security, need to be preserved even as they are retooled for the 21st century. To do otherwise is to deny the evidence.
President Obama must explain to the American people that the country needs to continue relief and recovery efforts, especially programs to create jobs. Without that, tens of millions of Americans stuck in poverty will have little hope of climbing out — and many more could join their ranks.
聞譽不蕩神，聞毀不移志
日前台灣智庫董事長陳博志及新台灣國策智庫董事長吳榮義，先後發言批評當前政府的施政方針。陳博志認為政府忽視資本成長變慢的事實，又放任房價上漲以創造表面的繁榮，還不斷以口號治國，實為危機所在；吳榮義則對失業、薪資倒退及所得分配惡化等問題示警，籲請馬政府體察民瘼、廣納雅言，時時反躬自省。
陳博志與吳榮義兩人是國內知名的經濟學者，又曾在民進黨執政時期擔任閣員參與國家經建規劃，不論是學理或實務，對台灣經濟問題知之甚深。這些建言確實具有參考價值，馬政府的官員們實不必看到這些指正，就急著發澄清稿反駁。非但不應反駁，反而該深入研究這些批評，有則改之，無則勉之。
首先，有關口號治國的問題，雖自民進黨時代已然有之，但馬政府這三年來也不遑多讓，從六三三、愛台十二建設、庶民經濟直到黃金十年，大大小小口號不勝枚舉。這些新瓶裝舊酒的口號已讓人倒足胃口，馬政府必須知所警惕，以免適得其反。
其次，有關失業問題，台灣失業率雖已降至5％以下，但其中確實仍有逾十萬個就業機會是政府促進就業計畫創造出來的，而且更令人憂心的是如 今全台就業者中有200萬人月收入不到2萬元。這些現象說明台灣就業問題依然嚴峻，相關主管官員不能只看數字的表象，而應設身處地的想一想，當國內五分之 一的就業者拿著如此微薄的薪水時，我們能說台灣的就業情勢已經改善了嗎？
我們還要指出的是，稍微了解就業調查者都知道，「非勞動力」與「失業者」之間存有統計上的灰色地帶，去年底台灣賦閒在家的其他非勞動力人 數已近百萬人，五年之間成長逾五成。這是因為找不到工作而退出市場賦閒在家，或者是提前退休賦閒在家，目前不得而知，但無論如何這都是當前勞動市場的大問 題，值得深入探究。官員們豈可只看表面的失業率下降，就認為失業情勢已雨過天青？
第三，有關所得分配的問題，從表面上的五等分位所得差距可以發現，98年的原始所得差距已升至8.22倍的歷史新高，並且是首次升逾8倍 的一年，這難道不是警訊嗎？政府習慣援引的6.34倍係經政府社福及稅收重分配之後的結果，但值得注意的是，其中改善所得差距的效果逾九成來自社福，累進稅原本應有的效果幾已蕩然無存，這難道也不是大問題嗎？
再者，政府經常援引美國9.57倍、新加坡12.7倍比我們的6.34倍高，這又是不求甚解的比法。須知，美國此一所得差距有計入資本利 得，而台灣卻沒有；新加坡這個所得差距是政府重分配之前的原始所得差距，和台灣6.34倍這一重分配之後的倍數，立足點不同，又豈能進行比較？既無法比 較，又豈能得出台灣優於美國、新加坡的結論？
第四，有關薪資倒退一事，從名目薪資而言，台灣去年1~10月的每月平均薪資（含經常性及年終、加班費等）44,919元，確實比87年的40,212元來得高。但是若從民眾的感受來說，這12年物價也漲了近12％，經物價指數平減後的實質薪資，去年降為42,650元，與87年的水準相同，顯示台灣受僱者的薪資停滯問題極為嚴重，這已是不容否認的事實。
但政府主管官員回應薪資停滯這個問題時，竟以去年實質薪資的年增率創近17年新高，避重就輕，答非所問的帶過。如此這般的回應非僅毫無意義，也讓人懷疑馬政府改善國人所得的決心與誠意究竟何在？
我們認為「聞譽不蕩神，聞毀不移志」才是馬政府應有的態度與高度。面對在野人士的批評指教，政府官員應有雅量接受而加以改正才是，豈可把一切問題又丟給前任政府？如此我們要政黨輪替何用？遺憾的是，這些年來我們所見到的情況實在令人失望。政府大員們一聽到台灣在國際競爭力排名躍進，便喜不自勝，演講造勢時總得拿出來炫耀一番；當輿論有所批評時，則各部會爭相發稿澄清，猶恐奚為後我。這番光景，這樣的執政態度，豈能不讓人憂心。
明朝呂坤的呻吟語有句話說：「大其心，容天下之物；虛其心，受天下之善。」我們希望馬政府的官員們能以此自勉，唯有具如此高度的執政團隊，才有可能開啟台灣未來的黃金十年。否則所謂的黃金十年，幾年之後恐將成為大家茶餘飯後的談笑題材。
沒有留言:
張貼留言