[ Despite important strides that the United States has made toward
racial equality in the 60 years since the March on Washington, we have
yet to address the persistent poverty and unemployment that turned
Martin Luther King’s dream “into a nightmare.”]
[[link removed]]

LET’S REMEMBER THAT MARTIN LUTHER KING’S DREAM INCLUDED FULL
EMPLOYMENT FOR ALL  
[[link removed]]


 

William P. Jones and Algernon Austin
January 16, 2023
MarketWatch
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ Despite important strides that the United States has made toward
racial equality in the 60 years since the March on Washington, we have
yet to address the persistent poverty and unemployment that turned
Martin Luther King’s dream “into a nightmare.” _

Martin Luther King Jr, Walk to Freedom Detroit, Michigan, June 23,
1963, an estimated 125,000 people marched down Detroit’s Woodward
Avenue., Photo credit: Andrew McFarlane / Michigan in Picture / Flickr


 

Two years after Martin Luther King Jr. described his famous dream at
the 1963 March on Washington, he confessed to his congregation at
Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta that the “dream has often turned
into a nightmare.”

His dream was “shattered” by continued violence against
civil-rights activists in the South, but also by the “sense of utter
hopelessness” that King saw among unemployed men and women in
Harlem, Chicago, and other Northern cities. “And not only
Negroes,” King declared. “I’ve seen my dream shattered because
I’ve been through Appalachia, and I’ve seen my white brothers
along with Negroes living in poverty.”

Despite the important strides that the United States has made toward
racial equality in the 60 years since the March on Washington, we have
yet to address the persistent poverty and unemployment that turned
Martin Luther King’s dream “into a nightmare.”

Poverty amid prosperity

As we celebrate MLK Day six decades later, the plight of unemployed
Americans remains depressingly similar. As in 1963, we live in an era
of relatively high employment. Yet, also like the past, those national
figures are riddled with local exceptions, particularly in
African-American communities where unemployment remains roughly twice
the rate for whites.

In fact, the disparity has not changed in the 60 years since the March
on Washington. The pockets of joblessness that King saw among white
workers in Appalachia persist in Carter County, Ky., as do high
unemployment rates among Latinos in Imperial County, Calif., and
Native Americans in Apache County, Ariz.

Addressing those persistent pockets of unemployment requires a
federally funded program aimed at creating new jobs at prevailing
wages. By covering some or all the costs of hiring new employees, a
subsidized employment program can increase demand for workers, provide
needed services, and generate economic development in the most
economically stressed areas of the nation.

Eliminating the disparity between Black and white jobless rates would
provide employment for about 1.5 million African-Americans, with
roughly an additional $70 billion in wages going to Black
communities. Subsidized employment would also raise overall income
in predominantly white communities, such as Appalachia, with high
rates of joblessness. 

But the benefits would go far beyond income, as jobs are created in
needed businesses and public services and develop skills and products
that benefit communities and drive economic expansion.

Subsidized jobs are effective

The United States has a long and successful history of federally
subsidized employment programs, particularly during economic
downturns.

During the Great Depression, the Works Progress Administration
provided funding for state and local governments that put millions of
unemployed Americans to work building roads, parks, schools and other
infrastructure, much of which is still used today. The Civilian
Conservation Corps also subsidized the employment of millions of young
men in road building, fire control and other useful projects.

In the 1970s, the Comprehensive Employment and Training
Act subsidized hundreds of thousands of jobs in local public services
and nonprofit organizations, including community arts and recreation
programs, health clinics, law enforcement agencies, child- and
senior-care facilities, battered-women’s shelters and weatherization
projects for low-income housing.

And during the Great Recession, the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act authorized states to use funds from the Temporary Assistance for
Needy Families program to subsidize employment in nonprofit
organizations, educational institutions, and state, local, federal and
tribal governments.

Subsidized employment programs are effective. A recent meta-analysis
of 102 randomized control trials
[[link removed]]—the gold standard for
scientific research—found that subsidized employment was the most
effective of four worker-centered employment strategies.

Subsidized employment was more effective than job training, job-search
assistance, and supporting entrepreneurship efforts at increasing
individuals’ employment and earnings. Additionally, these programs
have been shown
[[link removed]] to
lower criminal recidivism, increase public safety, reduce public
benefits receipt, and improve the lives of children while, in many
instances, paying for themselves in the long-term.

A history of discrimination

Unfortunately, the benefits of these programs have often been limited
by discrimination and instability of funding. By allowing states to
control the distribution of funds or to opt-out of the programs,
previous programs opened room for discrimination against the neediest
communities.

Although the WPA employed over 400,000 Black workers, the equivalent
of 1.4 million today, even more would have been employed had states
been required to hire workers regardless of race. While CETA and ARRA
included stronger antidiscrimination policies, they were both ended
before their full impact could be felt.

To be fully effective, subsidized employment must be controlled by
federal authorities and funded for at least a decade. To ensure that
funds are not used to fund existing jobs or to displace existing
workers, participating employers should be required to create new jobs
at prevailing wages.

Despite the important strides that the United States has made toward
racial equality in the 60 years since the March on Washington, we have
yet to address the persistent poverty and unemployment that turned
King’s dream “into a nightmare.”

A federally funded and long-lasting subsidized employment program can
be the first step in addressing that longstanding shortcoming and
toward Dr. King’s goal of full employment for all Americans
[[link removed]].

_[WILLIAM P. JONES is a professor of history at the University of
Minnesota and author of “The March on Washington: Jobs, Freedom
and the Forgotten History of Civil Rights.” ALGERNON AUSTIN is the
director of race and economic justice at the Center for Economic and
Policy Research in Washington, D.C.]_

* Martin Luther King
[[link removed]]
* Martin Luther King Jr.
[[link removed]]
* MLK
[[link removed]]
* full employment
[[link removed]]
* Jobs
[[link removed]]
* Racism
[[link removed]]
* African Americans
[[link removed]]
* Civil Rights
[[link removed]]
* civil rights movement
[[link removed]]
* March on Washington
[[link removed]]
* Poor People's Campaign
[[link removed]]
* Poor People's March
[[link removed]]
* poverty
[[link removed]]
* unemployment
[[link removed]]
* Equality
[[link removed]]
* Inequality
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]