Top Ten Cities With High Poverty Rates

[Scott Campbell]

I think the moral of the story is that liberal thinking leads to poor results.

[HowardRoark]

The next financial crisis is already here

By George Will

VALLEJO, Calif. — Mayor Osby Davis, who has lived in this waterfront city across San Pablo Bay from San Francisco for 60 of his 62 years, says: "If you have a can that's leaking two ounces a minute and you put an ounce a minute in it, it's going to get empty." He is describing his city's coffers.


Joseph Tanner, who became city manager after this municipality of 120,000 souls was mismanaged to the brink of bankruptcy, stands at a whiteboard to explain the simple arithmetic that has pushed Vallejo over the brink. Its crisis — a cash flow insufficient to cover contractual obligations — came about because (to use fiscal 2007 figures) each of the 100 firefighters paid $230 a month in union dues and each of the 140 police officers paid $254 a month, giving their unions enormous sums to purchase a compliant city council.


So a police captain receives $306,000 a year in pay and benefits, a lieutenant receives $247,644, and the average for firefighters — 21 of them earn more than $200,000, including overtime — is $171,000. Police and firefighters can store up unused vacation and leave time over their careers and walk away, as one of the more than 20 who recently retired did, with a $370,000 check. Last year, 292 city employees made more than $100,000. And after just five years, all police and firefighters are guaranteed lifetime health benefits.


Even the City Council has at last faced facts and voted 7 to 0 for bankruptcy. "The day after they voted," Davis says, "I didn't go out of the house — I was that embarrassed."

In other states, municipalities can pay for improvident labor contracts by increasing property taxes. But Vallejo's promises were made in the context of Proposition 13, which 30 years ago wisely restricted California politicians' reach for property taxes. In 1996, the Navy base in Vallejo closed, which probably pleased some local liberals who share the anti-military mentality of San Francisco, to which some Vallejo residents commute by ferry. Liberals who, Tanner says dryly, "want Vallejo to look a certain way," were pleased when Wal-Mart moved to an adjacent town, which now reaps the sales tax revenue.


Vallejo is an ominous portent for other cities, and some states, few of which are accumulating financial resources sufficient to fulfill pension promises they have made to employees. Are you weary of the crisis du jour — subprime mortgages and all that? Get a head start on worrying about the next debacle by reading Roger Lowenstein's new book, "While America Aged: How Pension Debts Ruined General Motors, Stopped the NYC Subways, Bankrupted San Diego, and Loom as the Next Financial Crisis."


"Next"? This crisis has arrived in Jefferson County, Ala., which includes Birmingham. Like Orange County, Calif., a few years ago, Jefferson County made risky investments in a desperate attempt to achieve asset growth commensurate with the cost of an infrastructure project. When San Diego was earning the sobriquet "Enron by the sea," firefighters could retire at 50 with 90 percent of their pensions — almost full pay for not working during half of their expected adult lives.


Credit Suisse estimates that state and local governments have a cumulative $1.5 trillion shortfall in commitments for retiree health care. But it is the pension crisis that most dramatically illustrates Lowenstein's thesis about the slow accretion of power by the unions. Pensions "are a perfect vehicle for procrastination; in the financial world, they are the most long-enduring promises that exist." Human nature — the propensity to delay the unpleasant — rears its ugly head: When pension benefits come due, the people who promised them, thereby buying labor peace and winning elections, are long gone.


Vallejo's unions contend that the city is solvent enough to meet its obligations. But last Friday a court disagreed, holding that the city is eligible for bankruptcy protection. A lawyer for Vallejo says the unions will have to negotiate a "plan of adjustment." Other cities are watching, perhaps including the one across the bay.


San Francisco recently reported that 184 of its employees made at least $30,000 apiece in overtime in the first half of this year. A nurse at the county jail made $128,000 in overtime, putting him on track to top his total 2007 compensation of about $350,000. Nice work if you can get it, and you can get it in many places.

[retailguy]

Go Pack -

Your wife's analysis seems to indicate that she believes that the City Council runs the town. While I disagree to a point, and point out as well that local politics vary from state to state, Scott's original analysis could apply to the City Council as well. It would be highly unlikely that a city would vote for republican leaning council while electing a democrat mayor. Could it happen? Sure. But some of these communities have been democrat controlled for almost 100 years. Others, over 20 years.

Why is this philosophy important? You implement what you believe. You support projects that are in line with your beliefs. To have direct say-so is almost unimportant. Where does the Mayor focus his efforts? On the projects he believes in the most. What determines that? How he thinks and what he believes. If he aligns himself with that party, doesn't it make sense those beliefs are the ones he works at whilst in office?

[GoPackGo]

Retail Guy-

To a large extent the city council does run the city. They vote in policies and legislation, and without their majority vote policies will not be enacted. I agree that it is more likely that a city that elects a left leaning council also would elect a left leaning mayor. However, that still does not account for the incredible amount of variation among cities in terms of their views on handling poverty. Just as all republicans are not alike in their approaches to social inequities, neither are democrats. Simply having a left leaning council and/or mayor is not enough to single-handedly effect the rates of poverty in the city. It is much more of a federal and state-level issue, and there are just too many variables to be considered to comfortably say that there is a direct relation between democratic leadership in a city, and the poverty rate (which is undefined in this analysis, and severely compromises the conclusions one is able to draw). While an interesting argument, and an interesting topic, there is no way one can say that this conclusion holds any water. Far more interesting when it comes to political leanings and poverty is the policy our federal government puts in place to help alleviate this major problem in our largest cities. To blame a mayor and/or city council is simplifying things, and to suggest that this is one of the primary causes of poverty rates (which seems to be what many are insinuating) is irresponsible in my mind. The causes of poverty are too complex and multifaceted to pin down to any one factor.

[texaspackerbacker]

I tend to lean toward the other alternative--NOT the idea that Democrats on the mayoral or city council level chronically promote policies that cause poverty. Rather, it is a case of the same kind of people who because of their own mindset are much more likely to be poor being much more likely to vote Democrat.

Achievers, people with traditional morality, America-lovers, etc. are far more likely to NOT vote Democrat--just as they are far more likely NOT to be poor.

The other factor, of course, is that good moral black people, good America-loving black people, good ambitious black people--in some cases, anyway, are STILL likely to be swayed by their own DEPRAVED LEFTIST SLAVEMASTERS i.e. "black leaders" who so effectively keep 90% + of black people voting Democrat.

[bobblehead]

What was poverty like in Detoilet in the 50s and 60s when one would assume the auto industry and manufacturing was going gangbusters? Has it gone south starting in the 70s? Did a Dem come in and just fuck things up because of corruption and incompetence or did the overall economy just suck?

I look at that list and see a bunch of rust belt cities that use to have manufacturing...guess that mayor is responsible for high state taxes or jobs being shipped overseas. I see at least two cities with high influx of poor immigrants (legal or illegal).

By and large democratic policies are responsible for those things. Now you can say the mayor in particular isn't responsible...but what a quirk of statistics.

[bobblehead]

It is interesting....soooo interesting to me that the stock market performs better and tends to be less volatile when Democrats are in power.

returns are on average about 5 percent higher when the White House is run by a Democrat than during Republican rule.

Very interesting. What is the percentage if you leave out the Clinton years with the residual effects of the Reagan/Bush I tax cuts, the dotcom tech boom, and the Republican Congress keeping Clinton's tax and spend tendencies in line?

More importantly once the corrupt accounting methods perpetuated under the clinton admin were reversed it had a negative impact on stock prices...yet we still had a big bull market. Moreso, stable stock prices isn't necessarily a great thing, stocks should periodically go bankrupt....except when democratic philosophy stifles competition, thus propping up weak stocks. I could go on for days on this one.

[bobblehead]

It is much more of a federal and state-level issue, and there are just too many variables to be considered to comfortably say that there is a direct relation between democratic leadership in a city, and the poverty rate

Dear Mrs. GoPackGo,


Actually the statistics bore out, irrefutably that there is a direct relation between democratic leadership and poverty...I think you meant that you can't say that it is the reason.... Again...just a quirky correlation with no basis in philosophy.

[GoPackGo]

i knew this topic would fire her up

a couple more thoughts:

has the poverty rate been in the top 10 highest for the entire time that the city has been "run by democrats"? or is this a recent number?

what types of policies are in place in these cities, who proposed these policies, and how do they impact the poverty rate? if your argument is that the mayor takes on projects that impact poverty rates, it would be good to know what those are in each city, and how they have effected poverty rates (I doubt that each mayor in each city has taken on that issue to the extent that it would have any impact on poverty). Also, if for the sake of argument this analysis is in fact correct (which I highly doubt it is) could it be possible that there are more people living in poverty in these particular cities because these are the cities that provide the most social support to these people? Research shows that it is extremely hard to move out of poverty, especially if that poverty is intergenerational. So it is entirely possible that people are seeking out places where there are social policies in place that support low-income families (e.g., low cost of living, subsidized housing, etc.). These things alone would not bring a family out of poverty, but would make their lives a lot easier, therefore attracting more people living at that income level.

[GoPackGo]

It is much more of a federal and state-level issue, and there are just too many variables to be considered to comfortably say that there is a direct relation between democratic leadership in a city, and the poverty rate

Dear Mrs. GoPackGo,


Actually the statistics bore out, irrefutably that there is a direct relation between democratic leadership and poverty...I think you meant that you can't say that it is the reason.... Again...just a quirky correlation with no basis in philosophy.

Actually it is very possible that there is no direct relation, as many factors could potentially come into play that might attenuate that relation. But I do agree, in this case it simply is a quirky correlation.

[texaspackerbacker]

i knew this topic would fire her up

a couple more thoughts:

has the poverty rate been in the top 10 highest for the entire time that the city has been "run by democrats"? or is this a recent number?

what types of policies are in place in these cities, who proposed these policies, and how do they impact the poverty rate? if your argument is that the mayor takes on projects that impact poverty rates, it would be good to know what those are in each city, and how they have effected poverty rates (I doubt that each mayor in each city has taken on that issue to the extent that it would have any impact on poverty). Also, if for the sake of argument this analysis is in fact correct (which I highly doubt it is) could it be possible that there are more people living in poverty in these particular cities because these are the cities that provide the most social support to these people? Research shows that it is extremely hard to move out of poverty, especially if that poverty is intergenerational. So it is entirely possible that people are seeking out places where there are social policies in place that support low-income families (e.g., low cost of living, subsidized housing, etc.). These things alone would not bring a family out of poverty, but would make their lives a lot easier, therefore attracting more people living at that income level.

I say again ....

She is right in the sense that it isn't the policies--there's just not that much difference on the local level in what one party can do from the other.

Rather, IT'S THE PEOPLE--THE KIND OF PEOPLE who doom themselves to poverty--that kind of people are far more likely to vote Democrat.

And then, of course, there's the black thing--the fact that their corrupt "leaders" have sold out to the left, and are so successful at keeping 90% + of them down on the liberal plantation.

[bobblehead]

It is much more of a federal and state-level issue, and there are just too many variables to be considered to comfortably say that there is a direct relation between democratic leadership in a city, and the poverty rate

Dear Mrs. GoPackGo,


Actually the statistics bore out, irrefutably that there is a direct relation between democratic leadership and poverty...I think you meant that you can't say that it is the reason.... Again...just a quirky correlation with no basis in philosophy.

Actually it is very possible that there is no direct relation, as many factors could potentially come into play that might attenuate that relation. But I do agree, in this case it simply is a quirky correlation.

Your missing my point...the top ten are run by democrats....that IS a direct relation (although you would argue not the cause). A statistical relationship doesn't have to be rooted in cause...simply in math. In this case there is a direct statistical relationship between the 10 impoverished cities and their mayors political party...indisputable...unless you dispute the laws of mathematics. What you mean to say is that its some cosmic form or weird coincidence that democratic policies lead cities into poverty.

[mraynrand]

There is also a bizarre correlation between the most liberal cities and the highest crime rates. But I'm certain that would all be solved if, like in the old west, everyone checked their guns at the gates to the city. No guns - no crime.

[GoPackGo]

I say again ....
She is right in the sense that it isn't the policies--there's just not that much difference on the local level in what one party can do from the other.

Rather, IT'S THE PEOPLE--THE KIND OF PEOPLE who doom themselves to poverty--that kind of people are far more likely to vote Democrat.

And then, of course, there's the black thing--the fact that their corrupt "leaders" have sold out to the left, and are so successful at keeping 90% + of them down on the liberal plantation.

people do not "doom themselves to poverty". That is the most ignorant comment I have heard in a long time, and to boot, not all black leaders are corrupt, just as not all white leaders are. Good lord people, there is much more to intergenerational poverty than a CHOICE!

[Scott Campbell]

She's going to hate Packer Rats if you keep this up.