Capping the number of visas issued to foreign-born tech workers restricts the number of U.S-born workers that firms could hire – and the Bay Area is feeling the brunt of that impact, according to a new study.
“As the company becomes more productive because of the contributions of these (foreign-born) people and grows, then it will demand more workers – workers who are there (in the U.S.) will participate in the growth of the company,” Peri said Thursday.
Low-wage workers know they have to enhance their skills to escape low-wage jobs, but long hours and multiple jobs make skill-building and education nearly impossible, according to a new policy brief released by the Center for Poverty Research at the University of California, Davis. Joining us to talk more about the research are the authors of the brief, Victoria Smith, a UC Davis professor of sociology and a faculty affiliate for the Center for Poverty Research, and Brian Halpin, a graduate student in sociology at UC Davis.
THE immediate impact of the recession — widespread buyouts and layoffs — may be fading, but the fear of losing a job hangs over workplaces like a cloud of worry.
“There’s a myth that in the 1950s, everyone was very loyal to companies and companies were very loyal to people,” said Ann Huff Stevens, a professor of economics at the University of California, Davis. “But we always had a contingent work force that could be laid off at any time. They were called women.”
Low-wage workers wanting to enhance their skills and move into higher-paying jobs are blocked by working long hours and multiple jobs that make skill-building and education nearly impossible, according to a new policy brief released by the Center for Poverty Research at the University of California, Davis.
In the ongoing study, Victoria Smith, a UCD professor of sociology and a faculty affiliate for the research center, and co-author Brian Halpin, a UCD graduate student in sociology, conducted interviews with 25 low-wage workers in the Napa/Sonoma area in the fall of 2012.
“People find themselves very caught up, just treading water. The fact that they often are supporting other people heightens their need to take extra hours when they can get them,” Smith said.
For the long-term unemployed, finding a job is hard — but keeping one may be even harder.
…Negron’s experience echoed prescient research conducted nearly two decades ago by economist Ann Stevens, now at the University of California at Davis. She looked at data tracking workers from 1968 to 1988 and found that 41 percent who lost their job once were unemployed at least once more during that period. Almost all of the subsequent job losses occurred within five years of the first one.
Stevens’s study did not explore the fate of the long-term unemployed. Still, she found that multiple spells of unemployment depressed workers’ wages by 9 percent even after several years.
“I think of the unemployment issue as another form of inequality,” she said in an interview. “In some sense, it’s the same people experiencing repeated unemployment and repeated job losses.”
In America’s new normal, plenty of Americans will tumble into poverty at some point – but few will be stuck there forever.
Nearly one in three Americans experienced a stint of poverty between 2009 and 2011, a new Census Bureau report finds, but only a fraction of those people were stuck below the poverty line for the entire three-year period.
“There’s a lot of movement in and out of poverty,” said Ann Stevens, director of the Center for Poverty Research at UC Davis.
California, the state renowned for Beverly Hills mansions, glittery Hollywood stars, Malibu beaches, palm trees, and the stunning Golden Gate Bridge, hides a deep, dark secret – it has the nation’s highest poverty rate.
“Housing costs in Nevada or Florida… are nowhere near this extreme,” said Ann Huff Stevens, director of the Center for Poverty Research at University of California-Davis, in an interview. “It is important to note that California is a very expensive state, but it is also important to keep in mind that this is the main factor that makes our poverty rate jump from slightly higher than the national average in the official measure to number 1 in the supplemental measures.”
When President Lyndon Johnson declared an “unconditional war on poverty” in his State of the Union address, 50 years ago this week, the official poverty rate was 19 percent.
Last year, it stood at 15 percent. And so the war goes on.
What that official measure of poverty fails to capture are other, harder-to-quantify successes, according to Ann Huff Stevens, economics professor and director of the UC Davis Center for Poverty Research.
“Because we now provide a substantial number of low-income families with Medicaid, with health insurance for their children, with food stamp nutrition support, with school lunch, we see improvement in the health of the poor people,” Stevens said.
In the 50 years since Pres. Lyndon B. Johnson declared “an unconditional war on poverty,” the United States has gained ground in some areas of the fight and lost in others. Income disparity between rich and poor Americans has increased, while programs like food stamps and unemployment insurance have made a huge difference in reducing poverty rates.
One of the initiatives signed by Johnson during his presidency is the School Breakfast Program. While it isn’t responsible for decreases in poverty, it has successfully fed hungry children and increased learning in poor areas of America. Joining us with an evaluation of the School Breakfast Program is Assistant Professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Iowa David Frisvold, who is speaking at a UC Davis “War on Poverty” conference Thursday.
During the tail end of the recession and its aftermath, nearly a third of Americans suffered bouts of poverty lasting two months or more, the U.S. Census Bureau found in a newly released report.
“The fact that someone comes out of poverty for a few months should not lead us to conclude that poverty is not chronic,” said Ann Stevens, director of the UC Davis Center for Poverty Research. Though only 3.5% of Americans were poor throughout the entire period from 2009 to 2011, Stevens said, other research suggests many more bobbed in and out of poverty.
50 years ago today, then-President Lyndon B. Johnson announced the war on poverty. This “war” was meant to help the nearly 1 in 5 Americans who were poor.
Half a century later, after the country’s great recession, the number of people living below the line hasn’t gone down by much. That reality is also reflected here, where Californians tend to struggle more than the rest of the country.
For more we’re joined by Ann Huff Stevens, director of the Center for Poverty Research at UC-Davis.
On Dec. 28, right between Christmas and New Year’s, federal emergency unemployment compensation will expire, taking away the last form of jobless aid available to more than 3,000 long-term unemployed workers here in Maine. By the middle of next year, an additional 9,000 Mainers and their families will be left without any form of jobless assistance.
The Center for Poverty Research found that since 2009, unemployment insurance has been responsible for a 25 percent reduction in poverty among children with an unemployed parent.
Three days after Christmas, 1.3 million Americans will lose their unemployment insurance benefits after Republicans in Congress choose not to extend the Emergency Unemployment Compensation program, which provides jobless benefits beyond the traditional 26 weeks.
Additionally, “a recent study by the Center for Poverty Research found that since 2009, unemployment insurance has been responsible for a 25 percent reduction in poverty among children who have had an unemployed parent.” Now children in similar circumstances will have to endure life below the poverty line.
An alternative method of measuring poverty revealed that California is the most impoverished state in the country, with nearly a quarter of its residents living below the poverty line due mostly to housing costs.
Under the study, a household of two adults and two children earning less than about $35,000 would be considered below the poverty line, said Ann Stevens, director for the Center for Poverty Research at UC Davis. That number was increased from just over $23,000 used in the official poverty measure in 2012.
“It is almost entirely the cost of housing that is used to make the adjustment,” Stevens said. “It draws attention to the combination of the resources that Californians have and the costs that they face.”
A new way of measuring poverty reveals California has by far the biggest share of people in economic despair, eclipsing states such as Mississippi and Louisiana, when housing and other costs are factored.
The alternative yardstick, known as the supplemental poverty measure, found nearly 2.8 million more people are struggling across the country than the traditional benchmark shows.
“Anyone who has moved to California from somewhere else knows the dramatic increase of the cost of living,” said Ann Stevens, director for the Center for Poverty Research at UC Davis. “It’s not more surprising that California looks more impoverished. It is really driven by the cost of housing. California is a very expensive place to live.”
“Even if the economy was rebounding, I don’t think the official poverty statistics show it that much,” said Ann Stevens, an economics professor who directs the UC Davis Center for Poverty Research.
Unemployment insurance gives many down-on-their-luck Americans enough income to stay above the poverty line, but Stevens said the official poverty measurements don’t count food stamps, housing assistance and other programs that help people survive but don’t give them cash income.
“They’re likely to be used to say, look, the war on poverty isn’t working,” Stevens said of the latest numbers. “We know these programs do have benefits, they just don’t show up in these basic statistics.”