Fw: An Article From Slate

Rakesh Bhandari bhandari at Princeton.EDU
Fri Mar 31 06:56:18 PST 2000


Brad laid out an alternative program:

And it's much
>better to attack inequality at the national level with overall
>minimum wage or EITC or (if you have a long-run view) education
>subsidies...

But why isn't the EITC (a reform first introduced by Reagan, no?) a transfer within the tax paying working class to the benefit of the low-wage paying employing class? Won't a Howard Jarvis emerge to exploit this intraclass transfer as well (no doubt to get tax reform that really only helps pretty wealthy people)? I also remember mention of some study that found that a great percentage of the people who qualify for EITC do not indeed receive it--is this true? And since welfare reform had to be conceded last time to get a minimally higher minimum wage, what would have to be given up this time? Can we really reform capitalism through national electoral politics to attenuate inequality and achieve solid reforms for the working class as a whole?

Yours, Rakesh



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list