Vox's Dylan Matthews joins Sarah and Matt to break down the jobs guarantee debate and discuss research on a promising school desegregation initiative undermined by racist police practices.
References and further reading
Dylan's jobs guarantee explainer (with links to Stephanie Kelton's writing)
Dylan's explainer of Sen. Cory Booker's jobs guarantee proposal (with links to Darrick Hamilton and Sandy Darity's writing)
Bryce Covert's piece on the case for a jobs guarantee
Gallup poll on workers getting a sense of identity from their jobs
White paper on school integration "risks and benefits"
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
So the Infinity war of research papers. I haven't seen the movie, I'm told us about population of excellent excited, allow welcome to another of the waves on the box, meaning I cast network. I met the place he has tried to day. I, Sir Cliff and also among live from New York City we have to Matthew, is with us today by down
Hey we bottle and on one talk about jobs, guarantee which has been a burning up, wonky twitter for the past week or two
I was also got a blockbuster research paper with some
Some real emotional highs and lows say in my pick any great Gilgad. It's why it's kind of sand,
the happy it sad, your cry or laugh it'll, be exactly my research, but before
that I want to get into the jobs guarantee. I don't send some great stuff on this. I mean, I think, an obvious question here is I'd. Why
He suddenly have three sort of prominent democratic senators, Corey Booker, christened Gill, Abram Bernie Sanders Indifferent ways tongue him at the idea that the government should guarantee that everybody who wants to get a job should get a job and part of it,
I mean I think, comes down to politics. I mean candidates for office have always talked about jobs. Jobs are good. Jobs are popular, puts, appalling was done recently by civil analytics, which is a big democratic party, dad affirm and in it asked the question of.
Whether you would favour Congress passing a law that would put a five percent income tax and everyone who makes over two hundred thousand dollars a year and the money would be used to ensure that the government can give a job to everybody who wants one and he pulled really well.
Fifty two thirty four of any pulled really well, even though the question was deliberately written, a letter timetable do advocacy pause, but the question wording like designed to make people say yes, this was the opposite like this was done. The poor specified that Democrats were proposing this. It specified that it would have a cost and and higher taxes
People still still like the idea- and I think you see, like a number of fictional presidents- have toyed with this idea. It, sir in Dave the every man who becomes president.
Poses a jobs. Guarantee and house of cards is jobs, guarantee programme, and I think this
like an idea that
sounds really good to people like we ve talked him
in times of Michel, about work requirements like people not wanting to help the undeserving poor, but people really do want to help people who are like man I just like I want to get it, get a job
about their lending is also this policy community of people who have been working away. I'm on the vision of a jobs guarantee associated with, but modern monetary theory, and don't like. Can you tell us what what are these? These plans that are out there
see BP and analyse the institute yeah. So there's there have been a few communities of mostly serve heterodox a little out of of serb mainstream economics. Folks interest in this. The first, as you said, is ran this group of
and ass you, who subscribed with their called modern monetary theory, which its
complicated and I'm sure I can't do it just as a summons summary, but basically think the deficits are really overemphasized. There are less of a binding constraint than you might think, and they think that the best way to manage the economy and make sure that you have enough demand for goods and staff is further government to act as an employer of last resort. Further the government to have a public jobs programme so that anyone who wants job can get one so that an economic downturns you dont get an upsurge of unemployment because of
when you want to job, can go to the government and then they get money which they can spend which helps the economy recover. So this has been a thing in an empty circles going back at least twenty or thirty
years and that the link of this to deficits right is sort of conventional thinking is oh, give
Everyone, a job might be really expensive. M m t think
I would say: is that no, the really, the thing we can't afford is to have millions of people not doing anything and that if you get them to do something that is more productive than nothing. There
more like affordable for society rate. I think that the way we think about it is empty. Your folks
then say things like that: the government can't run out of money. The way that, like an arcade, can't run out of tickets right that that the government Prince money, it's their thing.
That was actually scarce. Is resources to do productive things and when you have on him,
I meant you almost by definition, have productive people sitting around not doing productive things, and so the goal is to get them to be productive, and so this is their their plan for how to do that heavily now. Aren't you never whose face tat at the levy and
meet you at bard on his reading. A lot about this so has Stephanie Kelton, he's now at stony, Brook on Long Island and who has been an advisor to Bernie Sanders, which I think is been one reason. The series gone from for a small community of of academics, who didn't have much social cachet to being something within the mainstream of democratic politics, but that Bernie
a veneer of legitimacy that that wasn't there before and then you also have a community of economists from me
a racial justice tradition for more of a focus on reducing racial gaps in employment and wealth.
The solidarity at Adieu. Dark Hamilton at at new school have written a lot about jobs, guarantees in that frame, and they were the ones who wrote the centre on budgets, job guarantee plan, which was one of the reasons that this is serve. Take it off.
The bonds and then tell us a little bit because processing plants kind of Congress see, I think, Booker Sanders both have their own play
Toby. You talk there like kind of like what's going on there.
Right. So I think the order was
Joy brands, centre from New York in an interview with China, Callaway whose very outspoken, twitter leftist use, then very vocal in and supportive of of jobs, guarantees
so he talked to her and she expressed support for the idea of a didn't, have sort of a specific plan to make it happen. Creed Booker came up with the first legit
given that I saw us which would set up a pilot programme that you would you pick about fifteen communities, both rural and urban ones, so, like his hometown of Newark
the be one place, and then you, you have a rural area and and say was Virginia. That's that
also has high employment, and you set this up, you evaluate it.
Right, a fine control areas that are similar to the areas where you're doing it, so you can see what effect this has and so on
of going all in on this. This really dramatic wait. A reef figure, the american economy
you tested in a few places and see how it does Bernie,
his bill. I'm I dont know if there's bill text for his yacht, I've read the actual text of of Booker's Bowen and haven't seen text from for tenders.
There's wants to go in whole hog, as is his want, and so it's it's. So instead of piloting it in a few areas, you just stop the parameter
Let's go for it, so I understand the jobs guarantee as idea there are
people who are sitting around who might be interested in working but for some reason, can't find work who Edith, who want to do something and that we would
better. If these people were doing something productive protest
waiting in the labour force, that part B in others think there's two separate arguments about that:
better for them, and we can argue about whether that would be better for them and not be better for the economy
I get a little stock on both of them and I'm curious still inhuman, riding on this. When people talk about jobs guarantee, do they frame it as
this is what is good for these people, or this is what will be
for the economy or like this is
be good for the Democrats politically, as like Matt was talking about what the polling like. What's that,
driving arguments that you hear from the people who like pushing this at this particular moment,
oh, he sometimes hear it pitched either
alternative or or served in conjunction with the basic income on that their boat sort of utopian.
First, we imagining what the
often hear from job guarantee advocates. Is people don't just want money? They won't work. They want the dignity that comes with work. They want the feeling of being productive. They want to be connected to a process and in society greater than themselves
and so just giving them money doesn't satisfied that and they
really view it, as is qualitative leap, different to offer every one work rather than making people work and then not creating a situation where they can find it on that think that would be their critique of Burke requirements of four Medicaid verb. Food stamps on the welfare work requirements that that came up in the nineties is that you put this expectation on people without.
Creating are the opportunities for them to go to work now that you are making on. I think it's important understand me. I think part of what motivates people in the palace,
b side of this right is that people don't like to talk about it. This way, because it's ugly but like the way you can Ahmad management works in the United States. Is it when the
employment rate becomes too low. The federal reserve deliberately slows down economic growth to try to make the unemployment rate be higher in order to avoid there being too much in
nation, but then, at the same time, we like as a society, have us Goldie attitude towards people who are out of work.
Right. So like one way to resolve this contradiction, I think, like the mainstream way that we resolve this contradiction. America is to try to use a lot of a few scutari rhetoric and, like you, don't have Chairman Powell, stand up at a press conference and say the reason we waste interest rates this week. Is that we were afraid that
Many people were finding work right instead, there's like a lot of jargon and sort of like hiding of the ball. That goes into it
but like another way, would be to say no, no like we can confront the reality that, like the predominant tool of macroeconomic management in the United States today, is to deliberately create a reserve pool of millions of unemployed people and, like that's, really like deeply problematic, and we ought to do things in a different way right. Would I think these plans get weird? Is that, like that
big revolutionary change. That is being proposed right that, like instead of the government working to guarantee that there will always be millions of unemployed people to keep inflation down that governs gonna. Try to guarantee that everybody be employed all the time.
His plans then, like also add in like three or four other radical changes.
So again the leaving institute plan. It's not just that. There's gonna be a universal employment scheme, but like
all the jobs are going to be in the public sector. It's not subsidization of private employment. All the jobs are gonna pay fifteen dollars an hour which is like much higher than the men
existing salaries. Everybody is gonna, have health insurance, which is not the way employment works. Currently,
and also the jobs are not supposed to like compete with or overlap with existing civil service jobs? And this
reasons for all of that right and you can get if you get into like arguing on Twitter with left ass to the like,
What's a, why do you hate people? Having good paying jobs and like I don't, I don't hate people having good paying jobs, I don't love unemployment, but it's like, I think, is problematic to just like try to bundle everything you might possibly want out of the world into one programme, unlike insist that it all go together. Like is a really real question as to whether the government could like set up shops in which people come through the door and they are given jobs of last resort and then the jobs of last resort that the government provides are like
Reasonably honestly administered and like it seems, ok and the money is an all just being stolen. I mean I'm not saying it's impossible, but like it's a is an open question. Rather, we haven't done
and then to say that you're gonna, like on top of that, put like three or four other like contentious radical changes to the economy.
Is it makes for an interesting book, but to me, like matter great political agenda,
Do you know a lot of the policy areas we talk about the United States, see no things like paid leave,
universal health care cover. Dick are things that we see in other countries that we see scandinavian countries, Canada using them, and we feel like hey. You know why not import that idea, whereas I think there are four.
Examples of job guarantee. Ain't done you written about some of the research from India, but it it does not seem to be the policy tool of choice for the things that job guarantee advocates want to accomplish it. When you look at either kind of our peer countries a bride. But what did you want to go back to exist? Something I've been thinking about. Getting ready for this conversation is this idea that comes up about this sense of identity in value from work, and this is something I was reading brace coverts case for job guaranteed in Europe.
Where she writes that Americans overwhelmingly want to work. Most people say that they get a sense of identity from their job, which links to a Gallup poll on this, and
the numbers kind of a let down from how they were framed. So this is a Gallup poll, so it finds the top line is at fifty. Five percent of workers get a sense of identity from their job, but when you break that down a little bit
It's really a lot of college graduates who are getting a sense of identity from their job, I'm seventy percent of college graduates in every sense of identity furthest, twenty nine percent. You say that's just what do you do when you look at people didn't graduate college? You know their majority flips forty five percent say they get a sense of identity.
Once it's just, what do you do? If you look at a kind of low income worker, you see the same kind of split forty, three percent identity. Fifty two percent
it's just what you do- and this is one
things that I'm a little kind of skeptical, even thinking about before we get to the details of a cow. What a policy like this work is well,
This is that this notion that a job-
thing that's going to give people a sense of
Dignity is, is act
true of the type of people who would be participating in a jobs,
an T programme, unlike what what we expected
people? I think there are a lot of jobs and like even our job
this report, which I think we'd all probably like fit in the sense of identity, that we identify as journalists to you, no great things and our computer on the internet, but like there's some part,
swear. It's like this is just
I do when I did you, like certain trainings, vocs, video there's like boring
paper work or stories. I don't really feel like doing.
Benson doing expenses is a good example, but there's some, you know like there's entire movies like office space that are just about the fact like aren't you
was terrified, unproductive and-
I just question. The underpinning of this whole place that the type of job
be created are the ones that would kind of Crete the sense of
density and purpose and whether were asking kind of too much of
what a workplace is going to do. For four people on this situation. Yeah
The motivating research there is that there is a lot of serve research and subjective wellbeing and even to sort like medical conditions that suggests that unemployment is one of the very, very worst thing that could happen to you that the people who go through a spell of unemployment report significantly worse well being for four years. After
its long term. Unemployment is Israel, a terrible for you to his rates. Early mortality goes up. It's it's just
never can social cost. I think the issue is that
that's all evidence we have from a world in which work is not universal and
wait. What and this is where. I actually think that the programme designed details matter a great deal and you, I think you can't separate, like the conceptual issue that sir, but on the table with the programme design questions, and I think that the the people from these, like lefty organizations, are actually really getting this raw weight, that, to the extent that jobs are a source of meaning in people's lives, which I think is clearly they are for some people, but not for other people. If the way your job guarantee works is
A person who doesn't have a job can go to the job guarantee Office and they are then assigned some kind of semi meaningless task in the like job guaranteed department, and you have
a little name tag. That's, like you know, like Illinois, department of guarantee jobs and you're doing something like your cleaning city park. Sorry, you no such thing as useful, but that, like society, can can do without that's clearly going to be in the category of the kind of job that doesn't give people the
sense of meaning and identity, because it's going to be siloed off from all the other kinds of work right I mean it's going to be the equivalent the jobs equivalent of having a snap card right, which I mean people people like that they get nutrition, assistance, benefits and people who would appreciate the money that would come with the jobs guarantee job.
But you would be still marked out as the person on the jobs guarantee and the jobs would have to be relatively basic, relatively low skill kind of work,
What are you doing in my piece about this? Is that I think we should take the idea of guaranteed work seriously rather than literally, and they just like the government should make it harder effort to get people into jobs than it had spread that, like one of the legacy of the great depression and nazi fascism and the cold war, and all that stuff was like for several decades, governments in the West were like really really really paranoid about mass unemployment. They thought that going through another,
spell of mass unemployment would be a huge social catastrophe and they were determined to not make it happen and the employment, a population ratio kind of just like steadily rose for decades and decades in the United States.
It's more recently, like policymakers have not taken that view, and so we ve seen the share of people, have jobs kind of falling sort of steadily, and I think you know
a good case that we should. We should turn that around and you know,
can do that with monetary policy in detail with fiscal policy. This is a lot of things you can do
but then the role of direct sort of government created jobs programmes, it seems to me- should be for specific, vulnerable populations,
we're like like a classic case of this, as we know at any given time, there's a lot of people who are in prison right
and then most of them get out of prison at some point, and we asked like
as a society like what do we want somebody to do when there no longer in prison? I think what
want them to do is like go, get a job that we don't really
we very much to facilitate that happening,
and it seems like a really obvious sort of case for like there should be a programme for that. There should be a programme for people who graduate high school in good standing, but aren't going to college like what do we want people like that to go to work but like what are we doing to help them get work
seems like often not very much yeah? I think sometimes this debate is or frustrating we, apart from. Our actual experience, was subsidize work programmes which, to your point, most of the time when, when the U S has tried subsidize work, it's not in the context of of cervical
broad population that sometimes like during the great recession. Part of the stimulus involves like a ramp up of public jobs, but most of the time-
its people coming out of prison. Its disabled people who might wanna give workers shot and might prefer worked to getting disability benefits.
Single mothers who are full time. Caregivers me, disabilities are really good case. He arrived cause. I you might have been working then developed a medical condition that prevents you from doing the job that you were doing before, unlike in principle, you would like to do something else
like that could be challenging re right and so, like the government, might try to help in that situation. Right
and help you get new skills like maybe you are a cool minor and you, you developed a back injuries that you can't might call anymore and you wanna, be a medical assistant and do insurance filing claims filing and then, like the government, will give you some training to do that. Then you go get a job doing that, but you're not like physically prevented from too,
that seems like a perfectly good use case. There is a really good review of experiments that have been die. My gradual randomized experiments on their team at Georgetown. For
other, and the federal government has invested a lot like through each US through the departments- labour such security administration, in trying to figure out ways to help people in vulnerable groups.
Transition back into employment in their some models that seem to work there ve been tried throughout the decades
not. All of them do like. There was a recent bevy of of transitional work programme, specifically for ex prisoners, none of which found really significant earnings. Are employment impact sleep? You gotta subsidize job. He worked in that than the subsidy went away. You stop working
and I think that take away from that and the others take away is not. We should not try to help these people get jobs like we
and there are some techniques that are more promising than others,
mighty, whereas more like it's really really hard that, like these people are not working for a reason. It's in that there are there really deep barrier, third, keeping them from working related to societal,
my unprejudiced denial of skills and the lack of opportunities to develop skills and like we should address these things, but
Designing the programmes really really tough and it makes me
sound when allotted the job guarantee discussion, sort of hand, waves away, details about how to design the program, and so assumes that that that people get public jobs, jobs and we can figure out how to do that rapidly
an equally as specifically that that the hand waving takes place, I think of the major proposals I've seen by sort of punting the decision to state and local governments right. It's like people know that they can actually write down in detail. How you're gonna create a programs, get useful work for a large but also very heterogeneous,
yes, group of hard to employ people so what they say as I go, we're gonna have Satan local governments. Do it
a like framework of orphans, don't necessarily know how to solve unsolvable problems.
So like the reality is like
how'd, you do yourself not like way. You well meaning labour, all think a jobs guarantee programmes should be, but
Imagine what the governor of Mississippi is going to do with, like a jobs, guarantee slush fund right and like how how much dignity is there going to be in the in the work that's
created there right now. Sometimes I get the best you can do like this there's a reason. We have a lot of state federal partnership programmes and in the United States, but you know again like that, is an implementation detail right. If you saying the way I'm gonna work out, these details is by not working them out and just sort of outsourcing. The thinking to local elected officials like you're gonna, get what you get one thing:
I'm through there and just like stepping back from this, I feel like jobs, guarantee, sounds very exciting and big and, like this huge program that I think does appeal to that.
Kind of pulling but eat away at the scene,
I wonder if you are talking about set policy mad about other,
odds to accomplishing similar things. That might work.
Little better, but, like sound a lot less like
See policy wise, like I always think, of the difference between, like all pay, a rate setting returns, very boring and single hair, universal health care, or something big, an exciting and disruptive and like the
paralyse he hears you have jobs, guarantee or if something like a massive expansion of the earned
come to ex credit, so I could think through. Like I'm one area, there
comes up and lobbies, jobs, guarantee discussions is child care. That's an area where it seems like. We need more workers, there's a lot
of affordable childcare. What have we got more people working in the sky?
now. One thing you could do is open a bunch of
subsidized childcare centres, you can open a bunch of government childcare centres, but I don't know Peter
want to send their children to like child care center. Of last resort like knowing that this person has a gear,
indeed job of some level and I think Dylan you cited. Some research suggests that people who are put
like a guaranteed government job of trouble, transitioning in the private
get, but you could also see with them is a chunk us and others. Also a job of last resort expects kinds exactly. I don't really like when I think I've been Torreon child care facilities lately, and I don't think I will go to that one.
And I mean like even beyond the have issue you could see if you're going to have
wage guarantees and benefit, guarantees that actually doing the opposite of raising the price of tat
carries. The private centres have to compete. The foot
That seems like, unlike you, guys, can type something missing here, but an easier way to get to that is just some kind of like
Oconnors proposal to expand the earned income tax credit that is going to give
greater incentive for someone to think about doing
kind of work, maybe child care because their weight and get a much bigger tax credit.
Back, so I mean I earned income tax credit. It is not a job guarantee, but it feels like it pushes
in a very similar direction without end
kind of known direction and that we have a lot of research. I ve been doing there and income tax credit for a while in
that, a job guarantee wouldn't know
Thoroughly move us knights, who I think, you're hitting on something really important, which is that.
A job here- and he is- is appealing both because it employs all these people and because it sets up new services that people want a new government actions that people want they like in it
action to want everyone to have a job. Most of these advocates think we should have universal child care. They think we should have like a new green economy based on renewable fuels. They think we should have more transit and
and more trains so its natural to think we have this new pool of workers and we have all that stuff that we want to do so. Let's just get the workers to do the star
But a lot of these are actually like really hard. Skilled professions like childcare is, is a skilled jobs that, like in other countries like France, you need to go to to education school, to early childhood education, to do that kind of teaching and supervision. And, like me, we don't
something quite like that, but you do want some training. It's really appealing to think long.
Have all these millions of workers and so we're gonna kill the whole country based on solar panels, but like if I took
an employer of last resort job in the like green core, and someone was like our
On the first day, you should like put some solar panels on some houses. I would like break a lot of solar panels
Yes, there is a tension between wanting quality
services based on skilled labour, the creates like durable programmes, their high quality, and why
into employ everyone. Why? I want even put that a little bit differently, which is that
one thing you have to consider about some of these jobs. Is that, like me, if you just
Google right now for, like solar panel
dollar jobs like those job, vacancies exists,
Wait for whatever reason, to the extent that there are some people who do not have jobs in the United States of America right now. It's not because we are in the depths of a recession, and there is no employment to be found in the field of installing solar panels, but like beyond the questions of like training
like you would have to teach me how to do that. Work again. Worn homer like who is the unemployed population right bikes,
body who is disabled, because when on the job, injury is probably not going to crawl around on rooftops. Installing solar panel swayed like is not suitable to to that kind of situation. You know you could have of rigorous training programme for childcare centres, but again that just like that's not what you would want to put like re entering
prisoners swayed legacy is it is. It doesn't make sense on it on its face, and in general I mean it's just think,
it's a mistake to conceptualize the country as being in the depths of a tremendous were session, in which there's like literally no work around for peace
there was a story in the Wall Street Journal yesterday about like small towns, of the great planes that are trying to offer people moving bonuses till I come to town and and go do manual labor.
Air. So if you start off imagining that the promise of there's no work at all for anybody out there, and so we need a jobs guarantee, you could end up in almost the opposite situation, where we are now saying to people,
Hey wait like you, gonna lose your medicate benefits. Unless you move to North Dakota and go take this job, that's that's available there. When, if we really want to help people, I do think we need to think in a more targeted way about like what is there
their problem right, I mean it really does seem to me that we have a significant number of people who face the real barriers to working and they would like those barriers to be overcome, but, like you have to actually like
away at that problem? And then, as I was saying, on a MAC
economic level. Right like this, just a couple of big policy lovers that we have- and you can use
the ideal sea or wage subsidies or other mechanisms to like make work more remunerative for people who are at the bottom end of the spectrum, which would like give them more money, which is nice and also increase people's attachment,
before us, which is nice? And then you know my just like to me, the
I'll pay, a rate setting of the jobs guarantee world is like Federal Reserve policy.
Which, like I know, nobody likes to talk about on the stump, and I have no problem if
Priscilla Brander, Bernie Sanders or whatever like wants to call it a jobs guarantee, but the FED weeks policy decisions that drive the level of employment gains in the United States. We ve been for the past couple of years, slowly raising interest rates and we could just like not do that. We could put more emphasis on employment and less emphasis on inflation control and I think at some point you would like go too far down that road, but I dont think we're at that point, and you know if I were actually making policy as opposed to making slogans. That's the basket that I'd be putting like the vast majority. My eggs in
they're, just like just regular jobs. You know working for private employers, but in an economy where there's a lot of demand for work, whether or not you believe in the you'd like transcended value of the dignity of work, I think we all would benefit from living in a society where employers were eager to hire lots of people rather than being,
dingy about here, but I think, like another layer of this, I feel gets off hand. Wavy is what is the government's role and how much are they spending or how much are they doing like to run? This kind of jobs guarantee programme, unlike what do one of the things I ve seen for example, Kentucky is whirling out its Medicaid work requirement in July if it doesn't get held up in the courts in
one of the things were learning there is that it's pretty costly to administer a work requirement which is different but remote from jobs, guarantee that has some similar factions. Tennessee is cutting back on certain snap spending in order to try and finance a worker comment, because they're going to need these people to make sure that people are working, and I get a little sceptical about that investment on the administrative side of ay
requirement in terms of like actually standing up the jobs, making sure that someone who comes ended, like the job store, is able to leave with the job making sure that person actually gets to their job, that they too are figuring out. I'm guessing some kind of process. If you are not perfect
while at your guaranteed job for dealing with that situation, it seems like there's a lot of infrastructure that will have to exist.
Around building a programme like this, not not sing, it couldn't be dying, but then it kind of comes back to look well. What's what's the point where driving at here
would that money be better spent just given to these people too
people in some kind of universal basic income set up
verses, administering a programme. That's going to get jobs that are, for some people, sense of identity, for some people, just something
do during the day, that's kind of like another big question that runs through my mind of if we have this finite set of money, that's going to be used for ages.
Guarantee easy money being spent on the kind of structures that have to exist to guarantee jobs verses. You know just spent as money given to people to give them a kind of a higher standard of living. I want to return to the point about monetary policy for for a second,
possible- that I've heard this point from you mad a bunch of times and- and I agree with that to a large degree like I think the Federal Reserve should, instead of killing jobs, be like trying to create jobs and, given that weaken far below two percent inflation for many years, they should be like wedding. Inflation go alone higher. To make up
that create the jobs to create the jobs. My worry is like that,
can do that and they haven't been doing that and it.
I know your answer is just like a point: people who would be good for jobs instead of people who would be bad for jobs, but part of the appeal of jobs, guarantees that it creates the sort of per
a programme which, in theory at least eliminated,
voluntary unemployment, like no matter who is in charge of the government, though like if it if its becomes likes or security or Medicare in its sir, politically safe, even though serve Republicans and and people.
Who initially opposed it, come to power in the future like in ITALY
There are no obi affirmative picture of our politics where, as you know, maybe just enjoy brand appointment
glass, he has to be fed chair in, and you have this thank. I America experiences eight years of peace and prosperity, and then you leave and Tom Cotton appoint someone who wants the gold standard back in your place, and everything goes to hell.
Like my worry. Is that how do you just like change the structure of the FED so that, instead of carrying a lot about inflation, they like want people to get jobs? I mean I don't.
Super duper, have an answer to that question and that's why I do not object as much to this jobs guarantee rhetoric, as I think, a lot of people who have substantively similar opinions to me have because, like I, don't have a procedure, all fix for this problem, and I think that politicians winning an election by saying that they are going to guarantee everybody. A job is like a prick
the pre commitment device to then, like a point, strong federal reserve officials and go do things I just. I guess. I think that you can conceive of the labour market as equivalent to a social welfare programme where you create it, and then you walk away, and you say that your work is done. I just think the reality is that labour market policy is an ongoing process, like the most stem success for type like reemployment job training programmes in Europe. They call them active labour market policies and part of it being active. Is that it's just like it's an ongoing process is the thing you have to.
You all the time just like the military is always like doing stuff right. That's like always knew Hooper soldiers that training them. I don't know what they do at the mill.
But they don't just sit around and believe what we passed a law on the early. Seventy is like a hidden we're going to have a strong nets now, when it had so there we have it.
You just like the work.
Macroeconomic management like its ongoing and like
the reason, the great recession was so deep and so long and so shitty is that, like Barack Obama personally did not believe in the power of monetary policy to fix it, and so he did not appoint people. You heap largely just under point anyone at all or some of the people he appointed like thought that Benbow donkey was too aggressive and finding the recession like
It was a huge, huge, huge mistake and I feel like dialogue around the subject, is like weirdly polarized
There are some people who think Obama was just terrible and everything he did was a mistake and then the other people who think he was like a golden God who did nothing wrong? I think it was great he's got like almost everything right, except for totally wrecking the basic management of the economy, and the solution is not do
get out just like down, because if you look, I mean when you look at what the jobs guarantee born a stout check for the reference Sdr and the reference to the new deal, and it's true
after your created some direct employment schemes, he had the Debbie Pierre. He had this civilian conservation core and like that.
Right. I mean there's something wrong with public sector jobs programmes, especially if they do some useful stuff, but
The other thing he did was. He took the United States off the gold standard and the bulk of the job. Creating was done by that monetary policy mechanism because, like the bulk of people, work in the private economy- and I think
like they always well like that's just this is how it is you know, and particularly if you're trying to generically employ millions and millions of people across diverse circumstances in diverse communities like the thing, the private sector, it's really good at is just being flexible and like having different thing
going on in different places, because you don't need one. Guy till I write down what the rules are for everything and like the government can
The guarantee is a little bit weird ride like if you think about, should it be illegal for people to murder each other like definitely right, like bedroom
objective, then you try to think well like what is our no murders will happen. Guarantee policy can be unlike we don't. We don't have what you know.
And I dont know that we can really guarantee that nobody will ever be unemployed, but we can only try harder what
I think this is where you know: I'm kind of tractor to Booker's
plan. What does ideally, let's see what the fuck happened? We do this in fifteen cities like I know it is like more moderate unless exciting, unlike the Sanders,
go a lot whole hog, but there
I think and link. Don't you can correct me if I'm wrong, as he spent more time in this space,
but it seems that there is a lot we would want to learn about like what would happen to wages. What would happen to employment? What
happen to you know some other health indicators are talking about earlier, that we ve seen can be tethered to unemployment if we tested this out in some cities different
cities? Would it be different in urban area verses, a rural area as much as I even with all the scepticism is I've expressed here
like I don't know something about it works and like there is research to be done. That
like a kind of valid use of some amount of government funds just to see? Ok, look what what does this actually look like in the United States? If we try something like this speaking, experiments should pivot course juggler Peter Bergman,
yeah the Bergmann. Ok. So here we go this
paper. This research is called the risks and benefits of school integration call in evidence.
Randomize desegregation programme and so
School segregation is linked. We will talk about a lot on the question of what you could do to reduce it, I think, is difficult, unlike our
odd scale. But this this paper took advantage of a small scale, desegregation initiative that was relatively easy to implement and basically what they did was they took
a majority minority school district that was close to a number of higher income white school does
it- is in Palo Alto and serve the area
yeah in the history of Silicon Valley area, and so they say
Ok, the surrounding richer, wider school districts are each gonna need to take some transfer students from the poor black school district and the
did not take as many students has wanted to apply. So there was a lot or seek to compare. This
when the lottery and go to the rich white school to the kids, who applied for the lottery but didn't when it and stayed at home
I see a pretty encouraging. You know results on academic performance that the kids who went to that the white schools do better in school and they were more likely to go to college and this effect was driven by a tendency to
colleges. So it's not like you know. People then suddenly become academic superstars, but they did better in school. They stay in school longer
and evidence suggests setting. You know that will have big life on benefits.
Than the downside. I guess the risks of the title are that they got arrested a lot more. The book
that was driven by nonviolent offences and, in particular, driving offences.
Cause seem to be that these students are spending more time out of the place where they typically,
live, which makes you think I like. I don't think this is like a shocking conclusion to draw that
because these people were spending more time in these predominantly white areas they were being pulled over.
Cops more, that they are being arrested for a different kind of driving related
This is more than they would have been. If they had stayed in their home district and not spent much time out of it
to be clear, I mean who honestly like calling there's the risks. Integration can be read in adversity, like all they got arrested more as you like. Ok, so they're doing something wrong you it's like, on the one hand like some kids, are doing better in school, but, unlike others, are getting involved in crime and its do stay by the black now. The issue is that if you bring back children into affluent suburban white scores, you then have more black kids driving around white suburban neighbourhoods, and then they get a rest.
On nonviolent. I guess I grander moving offences as what it comes down to sew and its
it's bad, but also not like a reason to not do now. Let's go
integration programmes, it seems like a reason for some kind of police
training more than like. If you're seeing these gains from the integration
program at suggested. Something separate from the integration programme that it seems like Paralyzer, old cars should be less racist. Is what this himself well, but it's more like lucky you're, seeing here the deep social roots of segregation right, delight,
it could just be that, like through some kind of wacky happenstance, there happen to be this highly segregated residential neighborhoods. There were then creating segregated school systems and then, through some tweak to the school and take rules like we could undo
impact of segregation. You would have academic benefits so like all that is true right, but then what you see in the arrest patterns is that you know people live in segregated neighborhoods in part because of the like underlying house price dynamics, but in part because we shall minority groups- and particularly african Americans are particularly african. American men are made to feel unwelcome when they enter predominantly white neighbourhood.
Heads and that's bad on its own terms, is bad in these arrests terms, but it also just it just under
where's like why the segregation happened in the first place
There was a story in New York City. Recently I won a local newspapers reported on white families on the upper West side, who were like freaking out about a school boundary change. There was gonna send more by kids to the school that that their children attended and the schools chancellor, like tweeted this article out with its like click, baby
appropriately, disparaging headline about the white pants? And then the scandal became that he had treated the article, not that the white parents were freaking out about school integration,
and he was forced to apologise and say that, like of course, he understands that people are concerned about their.
Immunity is, and Bob Bob Bob Bob bubble Papa
and you know these are problems
like liberal parents who would say that black lives matter, and they don't think the Palo Alto police should be racist and bubble by all that kind of stuff
but it's like it's a both the desegregation programme worked, but also its undermined by all the same things. That are why the schools are so great in the first place, and I think it also I mean it suggests in this- is it's a just? What a difficult problem is going to be the exquisite you're, just gonna look
like Educational comes, it seems like this was a pretty big success. You got the things you wanted out of it that academic achievement improved more before going to tree or colleges that, since I could pretty significant shift for a
small period of time, on the other hand, I think, with his paper suggests to me as it's going to take-
more than that to see like real gay,
the gains that do not come that are personally
set by more arrests happening to students who are participating
these programmes, I mean one of the things I would love to see if there's some enterprise,
reporter out and out of there's more research on this. Is you know what happens to this point
is there still a lottery and a waiting list? Is it worth the risk
parents are thinking through. You knew I want my kids go to those better school, but, like I've, heard more people get arrested when they go to the school. Is it worth one? What do the lawyer had raised since I imagine will again if you had to come up with like us
every type of a like white liberal, but becomes a clansmen when their kid might be going to school with
A person like Palo Alto parent, like their concern, would be like you how these
they're coming in and yeah might be good for them, but there are gonna, be criminals and get arrested and they might look at this study be like yeah
like like it's exactly what I predicted and it's not bad at all, but but it
plays into those anxieties from that like class of person yeah, I mean. That is why I wish this paper had a different title.
Thing, because it I mean it's suggests that there are risks to the white students, possibly which is definitely not the case in this study
I've got to say so that experiences I have had as as apparent who lives in a neighborhood where the local public school is.
Majority minority is a lot of like Canada, weird whispered conversations among parents in the neighborhood about, like you know, you gonna, send your kids to get.
Send back well, things are changing and what about the things you know I'm like. I think we all know where things are changing, which is the demographic composition of the neighborhood, is what is changing but
nobody quite wants to say it explicitly right, but I mean this is
I think, like really the question about these initiatives like I, I think that
What you see in this study, I mean what you see over and over again, is that you now contrary to some some views coming from the right alike.
You know like racial discrimination is a real problem in America on an ongoing basis that does like concrete and relatively easy to recognise harm to people, and that, like we could and should try to remove.
He ate it, but also you look at those who are well. We should we should scale this MRS Scholars programme up, which they probably shared but
so to the extent that the big downside of the programme is that, like huge public sector agencies in Palo, Alto are organised to engage and systematic racial discrimination. That makes it seem unlikely to me that they Palo Alto parents again
really interested in kind is going to happen like I don't I don't know exactly, which is also not a policy problem right. It's like
actual like water people's opinions in american society problem right in
The paper mentioned a bunch of studies about what happened in Charlotte North Carolina when their desegregation programme got cancelled, got fears or a decade ago and mature enough, like all again scare reversed, like academic performance for black students, goes down. You easy a variety of poor social outcomes. Anything that's been
more the trend across the? U dot s. I did think it was interesting to read this paper in light of the failure of Senate bill, eight hundred and twenty seven, which was very ambitious bill in California. That would have required municipalities to allow a lot more multi family homes or for a six story. Apartments near transit.
Was specifically targeting places like Palo Alto, that I think a lot of courage of the bill focus on San Francisco, but please
We are told that are of wealthy white. Suburban communities are super aggressive about, like not just not letting like poor black people in, but just not linking apartments and period, and partly because of that, some of the biggest supporters of of that
There's a big letter from Like Richard Raw Steen and compassion
Vietnam. Are you a bunch of people who study ray,
segregation and neighbourhoods? Erudition all came out in favour of the spell, despite the fact that there is alive left groups that were against it saying you know the thing that will tear down segregation is, if you just let people build homes. The people, the poor people and people of color were bars are disproportionately economically disadvantaged
can afford to live in these towns that they went down? I know you're Europe optimistic mad about similar legislation succeed in the future by it I think, like that, sometimes gets bracket it as a housing debate, and this is a schools,
bait, but in America these are the same thing: why to eat
so saying. Also, you know, I mean the California
opposes some particular political questions are around housing, but this
They passed the state Assembly in Connecticut and has now pending in the state Senate that,
really poses the same question, but in a way that is much more politically aligned with this racial segregation issue and the
then it could bill would say that towns cannot ban the multi family housing that they have to allow for some construction of multi family housing, and this important in Connecticut is is not California in homes of its structure and Connecticut.
Just a handful of serve smaller cities where New Haven, Hartford Bridgeport, Stamford
that tend to be have a very large african american populations and then the vast majority, the state is world or suburban. The vast majority of Connecticut towns complete
We ban multi family housing, and there is no like luxury construction boom happening in. Can I get in either the small?
these have been to New Haven right
no- you just needs its different, my because in income for any link, the image of this sort of, like lack zoning, is dominated by conduct. Conversions in San Francisco and and West Ibis Angeles, where's Connecticut, really like lazy, clear right that, like the question is, is I will people be able to throw up a few apartment buildings in?
Why suburban town swayed is very controversial? It passed the assembly extremely narrowly with uniform republican opposition. I don't know if it can pass the Senate this term or or not limited
We are cases that is legislation that would let poor people move into rich towns with their fancy, segregated schools
and would probably make a big difference in
education I mean beyond,
the question of would like housing in the aggregate become more affordable. It would give new people access to school districts and that would have some real benefits for them.
It is also possible that if people were actually living in the school district,
they would have somewhat fewer of the policing problems that this kind of paper else,
I mean there's this an element of racially discriminatory policing being found in this paper, the disasters that
that, like there's a reason why people normally try to attend school close to themselves, rather than you know, driving around everywhere and so integrating the housing rather than integrating the schools, you know seems like a promising effort.
And with that we, yes thank you Dylan for joining us anytime, thanks and re out there for listening as always check out the weeds discussion group on Facebook. If you want to continue our station took out today explained if you want just pod cast every day
all day, all the time things are engineer: Griffin, Tanner thanks for producer, Brigitte Armstrong, we will be back on
Transcript generated on 2021-09-12.