This is a Footnote to the Post One Up - Don't Feel You Have to Read It

This is from an essay by Philip Pilkingon in Yves Smith's blog. I'm going to quote a large chunk, to be clear about what he is saying:

(Right wing libertarians) appeal to people at a very deep level. They appeal to a very real sense of longing for more substantial social relationships and less government meddling. They appeal to people who watch modern developments in Big Government with distrust and suspicion. Indeed, they appeal to many liberals.

It is to this that Big Government liberals have no answer. But there is an answer and it has been discussed on this site before. I refer to the Job Guarantee scheme as put forward by the Modern Monetary Theorists.

Much of the debate surrounding the Jobs Guarantee program – that is, the proposal for governments to hire everyone willing and able to work in a minimum wage job – has focused on its macroeconomic effects. The potential for such a program to generate inflation is, of course, the key focus. In actual fact the Jobs Guarantee program is devised in such a way that it puts a cap on inflation, but there has been much work done on this already and I see no need to repeat it here.

Instead we should focus on what the Jobs Guarantee program might be like as an institution. And it is here that we find it to be an antidote to the anomie and alienation that Lasch and the libertarians bemoan.

The Jobs Guarantee program is first and foremost a decentralised community-based institution. This is summed up well in a policy brief that I will soon be presenting to the Irish government:

The national government could set budget constraints for the local governments based on either a per capita basis or in relation to local unemployment rates. The local governments could then channel funds to already existing organisations – such as NGOs, grassroots community groups or charities – who could in turn use the funds to start up much needed projects and employ workers. If these organisations sought to expand their operations and required additional management staff they could then apply to the local government for an increase in funding. Local governments could also encourage the unemployed to form new organisations.

I commented:

Here in Minnesota, a lot of services are already provided by NGOs working under government contracts and with government grants. This includes a LOT of human services. If you are poor and facing hard times here, you are likely to be dealing with a case worker who works for a nonprofit, not the government — and who is not unionized and who makes lousy money. Well-known organizations such as the Salvation Army and Catholic Charities work under government contracts, which is why they have to obey government rules on fair treatment of employees and clients, including gay people, which is why they do so much screaming about their religous rights.

The system works reasonably well, though small and medium sized nonprofit organizations can be inefficient and unresponsive, and don't get me going about some of the religious NGOs.

I am not sure I would want NGOs to build bridges or maintain the state highway system. The current system, giving contracts to private, for-profit contractors who specialize in bridges and highways seems like a better idea. (I say this, in spite of the bridge that fell down. That was bad maintenance, because the State Department of Transportation is not adequately funded.)

The problem with the system right now is, the nonprofits are not getting enough money from the government or private donors. The MMT plan could deal with this.

However, minimum wage is not enough pay. After FICA, minimum wage is something like $1,150 amonth. A single bedroom apartment in the Twin Cities area is something like $750. That leaves $400 for food, clothing, utilities, transportation, health care and the cost of children or other dependents. I would say a more reasonable amount of pay would be double the minimum wage, which is $30,000 a year, about the amount of money a nonprofit human services case worker makes.

I guess I am saying that we have a system already in Minnesota where Federal money moves to the state and then to a wide variety of organizations, many of them private. A lot of government is about distributing money and supervising how it is spent, rather than spending it directly. So the face of big government is the for-profit contractor building a highway or your local community support program or shelter, run by a nonprofit.

The other question is what do the people who are hired do? The NGOs that have contracts with the government don't — at present — hire anyone off the street. They require certain skills and abilities. You may need licenses. You will have to pass a background check and a TB test, if you work with people.

This is leading us back to the CCC and the WPA, programs designed to give work to people who were unemployed. I, for one, am grateful for the trees planted, the park buildings built, the post office murals…