4 ms·

Instead of this tax credit for the already-middle-class, why not raise the standard of living in poor areas by investing in education, food security, health car

Instead of this tax credit for the already-middle-class, why not raise the standard of living in poor areas by investing in education, food security, health care and jobs in those areas? If it works, you raise the poor up to the middle class, reduce dependence on government subsidies, and grow the economy. Let's say you start a business in a poor neighborhood. If you hire locals you're by default investing in the local community and the local economy can grow. If you hire outsiders, they can come into the city and help new services start that will serve the needs of the workers, which will provide a limited impact on the local economy. If you provide assistance for education/job training, food assistance, daycare and healthcare, the local community can gain the advantages they need to get jobs. But if the jobs aren't local, they usually need major investments in public transit, so IMHO it's better to invest in local small businesses in these areas. So perhaps this $6,000 credit isn't a bad idea, but spend it where it really counts: poor cities and neighborhoods whose local economy could use it the most.

kratak 10y ago
How do you decide which neighborhoods qualify, and which don't? Just offering a tax credit isn't going to convince many people to start a business in a poor neighborhood anyway; usually, people avoid them because they don't want to work in a poor neighborhood every day, and because they worry about their safety. So are you going to have the government create businesses there? Also, what about poor rural people? It doesn't make any sense to start businesses there, because the population density is too low (and again, how do you convince people to start businesses in economically unviable areas?). The ruralites need to move to where the jobs are, but they don't want to do that.
- peterwwillis 10y ago
  Finding the disadvantaged areas is the comparatively easy part. Many municipalities have maps of neighborhoods that have food insecurity, housing insecurity, an obvious lack of transportation, terrible graduation rates and test scores, high crime rates, and a lack of registered businesses that aren't primarily liquor stores or fast food. Yes, it is hard to get businesses past the stigma of these neighborhoods. But what's the worst thing that happens? You offer the tax credit and nobody takes it? I think the bigger risk is if they take it, but the government doesn't step up to provide other services that are needed for these businesses to thrive. No, I would not say having the government open offices is going to do anyone any good. But it could be beneficial to start a program in addition to this credit where the government can go into these neighborhoods and have classes where they teach people how to become local entrepreneurs (I think they do this already in a limited fashion in "nicer" areas) Mainly my proposal applies to the urban poor, but rural areas still have some untapped opportunity. Take the rest of the world's rural poor as an example: small farmers organize into co-ops whose products are then sold on one or more markets (which depending on the market will be either horrible or great for them). I think in 20+ years when automated transportation starts to become a real thing, we'll be able to more cheaply scale out small manufacturing jobs to rural people. Ideally this could again use a co-op model, but I haven't seen many tech companies with that in mind. Everything I have mentioned, btw, you could start with a private organization and then get government funding to cover a portion of your expenses. For example, most food banks and school lunch programs get most of their funding privately. They could also re-route some of the ridiculous defense spending back into food assistance programs, which we know is a benefit to local economies.

kratak 10y ago

How do you decide which neighborhoods qualify, and which don't? Just offering a tax credit isn't going to convince many people to start a business in a poor neighborhood anyway; usually, people avoid them because they don't want to work in a poor neighborhood every day, and because they worry about their safety. So are you going to have the government create businesses there? Also, what about poor rural people? It doesn't make any sense to start businesses there, because the population density is too low (and again, how do you convince people to start businesses in economically unviable areas?). The ruralites need to move to where the jobs are, but they don't want to do that.

peterwwillis 10y ago
Finding the disadvantaged areas is the comparatively easy part. Many municipalities have maps of neighborhoods that have food insecurity, housing insecurity, an obvious lack of transportation, terrible graduation rates and test scores, high crime rates, and a lack of registered businesses that aren't primarily liquor stores or fast food. Yes, it is hard to get businesses past the stigma of these neighborhoods. But what's the worst thing that happens? You offer the tax credit and nobody takes it? I think the bigger risk is if they take it, but the government doesn't step up to provide other services that are needed for these businesses to thrive. No, I would not say having the government open offices is going to do anyone any good. But it could be beneficial to start a program in addition to this credit where the government can go into these neighborhoods and have classes where they teach people how to become local entrepreneurs (I think they do this already in a limited fashion in "nicer" areas) Mainly my proposal applies to the urban poor, but rural areas still have some untapped opportunity. Take the rest of the world's rural poor as an example: small farmers organize into co-ops whose products are then sold on one or more markets (which depending on the market will be either horrible or great for them). I think in 20+ years when automated transportation starts to become a real thing, we'll be able to more cheaply scale out small manufacturing jobs to rural people. Ideally this could again use a co-op model, but I haven't seen many tech companies with that in mind. Everything I have mentioned, btw, you could start with a private organization and then get government funding to cover a portion of your expenses. For example, most food banks and school lunch programs get most of their funding privately. They could also re-route some of the ridiculous defense spending back into food assistance programs, which we know is a benefit to local economies.