LVTFan's Blog

The Earth-for-All Calendar: March 27 -- Paine and Penn

Every proprietor, therefore, of cultivated land owes to the community a ground rent (for I know of no better term to express the idea) for the land which he holds.

— THOMAS PAINE, Agrarian Justice, Paine's Writings, Vol. III., p. 329 (1795-6).

If all men were so far tenants to the public that the superfluities of gain and expense were applied to the exigencies thereof, it would put an end to taxes, leave never a beggar and make the greatest bank for national trade in Europe.

— WILLIAM PENN, Reflections and Maxims, Sec. 222, Works V., pp. 190-1.

What's the real cost of living, in Pennsylvania?

Pennsylvania is a diverse state.  Its major cities and their suburbs tend to have higher costs of living, and its smaller cities and rural counties are much less expensive.  But even the least expensive counties have bare-bones cost of living far about the Federal Poverty Guideline.

Here are the Federal Poverty Guidelines for 2009, which were extended into at least mid-2010:

• 1-person family:   $10,830
• 2-person family:   $14,570
• 3-person family:   $18,310
• 4-person family:   $22,050
• larger families: add $3,740 per person

This week, the newest Self-Sufficiency Standard Study was published, for Pennsylvania.  I've collected the SSS data for some selected counties, and added some data from the Census Quick Facts site (county population, median family income 2008, and persons per square mile).  A few observations:

• The barebones cost of living in the least expensive counties is over 150% of the FPG for a single adult; and nearly twice the FPG for adults with children.
• A similar lifestyle would cost far more in Pittsburgh (about 250%, with children) and Philadelphia (about 300%, with children.  In suburban Pittsburgh, the figure is slightly higher than in the city itself.  In Lancaster County, the costs are similar to suburban Pittsburgh's.
• And in the suburban counties of Philadelphia, that still-bare-bones lifestyle costs more yet: 325% to 350% of the Federal Poverty Guideline.
• Few people live in the rural counties, where costs are low. (So are wages and opportunities!)
• Most people live in the urban and suburban counties, where costs are higher.  (And if they tried to live in the rural counties and work in the urban ones, their high transportation costs would eat up much of the difference.)
• High population density goes with high median income; low population density goes with low median income.

All these places need janitors, and nurses' aides, and fast-food workers, and retail clerks, and many other jobs which pay wages which are insufficient for an adult to live independently on, much less support a family on.  (And most places have zoning regulations which prohibit more than a few unrelated adults from living in a single housing unit, which would be a way to reduce the cost of living.)   Encouraging individuals to seek more education to move beyond these jobs is fine, but it doesn't mean that those jobs won't be needed in a hypothetical more-educated future.   Do we really expect that they will be filled by people who will be content with dormitory living, and not having children, or supporting an elderly relative, or that young people will fill these jobs briefly and then move into higher-paying jobs when they marry and have children?  Really?

Trickle-down economics doesn't speak to how all these people can afford to live.   The SSS is not a middle-class lifestyle, at least not the way most of us think of "middle class."  It is the just-getting-by-without-depending-on-help (though it does take into account EITC, CCTC and CTC; the EITC is only relevant in a few rural counties -- see the tables starting at page 42).  We need to understand why wages are so low, and why our wealth and income are so concentrated.  And we need to understand the structures that create this situation, in order to correct them.

Area	Population	Median Family Income	Persons per Square Mile	1 Adult	1 Adult, 1 Preschooler	1 Adult, 1 Preschooler, 1 Schoolage	2 Adults, 1 Preschooler, 1 Schoolage
Federal Poverty Guideline	source: Census Quick Facts site, except for Allegheny County: Pittsburgh city data			$10,830	$14,570	$18,310	$22,050
Erie County	280,291	$44,005	350	$17,344	$35,928	$46,676	$53,077
% of FPG				160%	247%	255%	241%
Allegheny County: Pittsburgh	312,819	$56,300 source: SSS	6,019	$17,431	$36,412	$47,857	52,009
% of FPG				161%	250%	261%	236%
Allegheny County: excluding Pittsburgh	total county: 1,218,494	$48,778 source: 2008 ACS	1,756	$20,013	$38,957	$50,226	$56,865
% of FPG				185%	267%	274%	258%
Philadelphia	1,547,297	$37,090	11,461	$21,392	$41,863	$54,705	$59,501
% of FPG				198%	287%	299%	270%
Bucks County	626,015	$75,701	985	$27,886	$51,253	63,821	71,846
% of FPG				257%	352%	349%	326%
Chester County	498,894	$85,547	573	$28,160	$51,853	$63,639	71,296
% of FPG				260%	356%	348%	323%
Lancaster County	507,766	$55,824	496	$19,223	$37,612	$48,400	$54,821
% of FPG				177%	258%	264%	249%
Bedford County	49,579	$39,754	49	$17,221	27,916	35,445	43,756
% of FPG				159%	192%	194%	198%
Juniata County	23,118	$42,705	58	$16,545	$27,412	$34,985	$42,355
% of FPG				153%	188%	191%	192%
Total	12,604,767	$50,702	274

Daily Kos: One Person's Lot is Person's Loot

Daily Kos: One Person's Lot is Person's Loot.

Eron Lloyd has an excellent post over at Daily Kos.  He's writing about Philadelphia, but could just as well be writing about most American cities and towns.  He writes,

At the Mayor's third town hall meeting last week on the budget cuts, I was handing out our Philadelphia LVT brochure to people before the meeting as usual when I had a brief but interesting exchange. A man walking into the building took a quick look at my brochure and handed it back, shaking his head. He said that he works for the city, and that "there's no money in land" to solve the city's problems. ...

After the meeting, I decided to test this person's belief while walking along Girard Ave. back to my car. Across the street were some vacant lots that looked like they'd been empty for years. It appeared to be about 3-5 lots in size, with huge weeds and junk all over the place. Rather than describing it in detail, have a look for yourself.

Eron goes on to describe the property, the public records on it, and the location, and then tells us that the property is for sale.  I'll leave it to you to read the rest of his post, and to consider how we currently finance public spending, and how the incentives affect our economy -- local and national.

Should we tax action, or tax inaction?

Joshua Vincent, of the Henry George Foundation in Philadelphia, is a keen observer of the scene, particularly of Philadelphia's scene.  This week he had an article in The Bulletin in that city, and he comes up with what I think is an interesting observation:

... on the revenue side we still depend too much on the taxation of action.

He continues,

The fact is Philadelphia relies on tax revenue from two things - labor and capital - that can be hidden, can vanish or can flee. Both are being whipsawed by forces beyond Philadelphia's control. There are few places to hide, especially from high tax rates on those two things.

Ben Franklin, technological progress and moral progress

I heard an interesting quote from Ben Franklin on Bill Moyers NOW program a few minutes ago, which sent me searching because it put the opening passage in one of my favorite books in a different light.  The first thing that turned up on Google was this, at http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-scientific-mind-of-ben-franklin:

This article appears in the WINTER 2007 issue of The New Atlantis

The Scientific Mind of Ben Franklin 

Jerry Weinberger

Had Benjamin Franklin managed to outwit the Grim Reaper, he would have turned three hundred years old in 2006, and would probably have been making plans for another three hundred. Journalist, scientist, diplomat, and vendor of the virtues, Franklin stands in our imagination as the iconic “First American,” the self-made man and proud inventor of the future. His scientific achievements were indeed interesting and impressive — especially his research on electricity and his invention of the lightning rod. But equally interesting, and far more complicated, was Franklin’s idea of science. He was, you might say, our first home-grown Baconian — seeing scientific ingenuity as the greatest delight and truest redeemer of human life.

In 1780, Franklin complained to his friend and fellow natural philosopher Joseph Priestley of the disparity between scientific and moral progress: so badly constructed were most human beings, said Franklin, that Priestley should have killed boys and girls instead of innocent mice in his experiments with mephitic air. How much better than the bratty kids were the results of these experiments. Scientific progress, Franklin commented,

occasions my regretting sometimes that I was born so soon. It is impossible to imagine the height to which may be carried in a thousand years, the power of man over matter. We may perhaps learn to deprive large masses of their gravity, and give them absolute levity, for the sake of easy transport. Agriculture may diminish its labor and double its produce; all diseases may by sure means be prevented or cured, not excepting even that of old age, and our lives lengthened at pleasure even beyond the antediluvian standard.

Later on, in letters to other friends, Franklin trimmed his timetable by a full nine hundred years, saying that a mere one hundred would see modern science produce discoveries of which he could have “no conception.” And he said again that the “art of physic” would advance so far and so fast that mankind would be able to avoid diseases and live as long as “the Patriarchs in Genesis; to which I suppose we should make little objection.”

What does an infant cost a young family?

The Self-Sufficiency Standard Studies, which have been conducted in more than 35 states so far (most recently Colorado, Pennsylvania and Ohio), show the bare-bones cost of living, county by county, for several configurations of family.

What does it cost for a single adult to get by?  How much does her cost of living rise when she has an infant? A preschooler? Both?

The Elder Economic Security Standard, new sibling to the Self Sufficiency Standard

I've posted before about the Self-Sufficiency Standard studies, which show, for a young family, the bare-bones cost of living by locality, for various configurations of family.  They answer the question "What does it cost to live here, without subsidies or help from relatives, with all one's most basic needs met, but no frills?"  These studies have been conducted in about 35 states, some as many as 3 times.

Now a similar methodology has been developed to measure the cost of living for seniors.  I'm looking at the study for Pennsylvania, where I grew up and where I still have an elderly relative.  He lives modestly in one of the more expensive counties, and based on what I know about wealth distribution among seniors, I've told him he's in pretty good financial condition for someone of his age.  He doesn't see it that way.

One Solution for Many Problems?

That was the title I chose for a short talk I gave at the "Building a New World Conference" at Radford, VA, a few weeks ago.  Here it is ... 

Philadelphia, its Wage Tax and its Residents

An article in today's Philadelphia Daily News caught my eye.  Philadelphia is home to several fine universities, some excellent medical schools and teaching hospitals, fine museums, Constitution Center and the birthplace of two of my favorite people, one in the mid 20th century, the other in the mid 19th century.  I visit its suburbs every week, and  have a sense of knowing the territory from having grown up in those suburbs.

The article, entitled Philadelphia targets one of its toughest problems, says, in part, 

Only 14 percent of city residents hold a bachelor's degree, according to the 2005 study "Graduate! Philadelphia: The Challenge to Complete," by the Philadelphia Workforce Investment Board and the Economy League of Greater Philadelphia.

In Boston, that rate is 25 percent; in Seattle, it's 36 percent.

Philadelphia's college attainment rate puts it at 92nd among the 100 largest cities in the country --€” scraping the bottom.

In fact, in Philadelphia --€” unlike Boston, Chicago or Washington, D.C. --€” there are more people who have started college and dropped out than there are residents who actually hold a four-year bachelor's degree.

What could be behind those statistics?