Over at Brookings Democratic operative Harry J. Holzer urges Democrats to adopt a policy to reduce poverty and increase opportunity in the United States:
As an economist who studies poverty and opportunity, and also as a former Democratic political appointee,1 my pragmatic view is that three key constraints should be taken into account if we are truly serious about making things happen: We need policies that are (1) based on the best available evidence on which factors limit economic success among the poor and which policies are most cost-effective in mitigating those factors; (2) consistent with the values and history of the Democratic party, while adapting to current social and economic circumstances; and (3) consistent with the broad values of Americans, so that they can generate political support and, ultimately, some bipartisan appeal.
The factors that limit success among the poor are pretty clear. The most important are their low education levels and weak skills; the low pay for unskilled work in the US, the correspondingly reduced incentive for many to remain in the job market, and the difficulty in finding or keeping jobs; and various “group-specific†barriers, such as growing up in a very poor family or neighborhood, having a criminal record, being a non-custodial parent, or having a disability.
His proposals rest on three pillars:
- Raise education and skills among poor children, youth, and adults.
- Make work pay†for the unskilled, and make more jobs available to them when needed.
- Address the specific problems of such groups as ex-offenders, non-custodial parents, children in very poor families or neighborhoods, and people with disabilities.
It makes interesting reading. I continue to be skeptical that education policy makes a good substitute for an economic policy. I don’t care how many journalism majors graduate; it won’t increase the number of jobs that are available that require majors in journalism.
The raising education and skills logic is no different than the aggregate demand logic – increase the supply of something and somebody will find some way to use it. After eight years of aggregate demand, we know that is nonsense, and the unemployed college graduates should be a clue as to the other.
Of course, I could be wrong, and negative interest rates will fix everything.