Good Start!

"Despite questions about whether the programs displace existing workers, many economists have argued that direct job creation programs are a more cost-effective way to put some of the nation's 14.6 million unemployed back to work than indirect alternatives like tax credits and construction projects."

Catherine Rampell, "Job Subsidies Also Provide help to Private Sector," The New York Times, July 28, 2010.

About 247,000 workers placed in 36 states and District of Columbia, financed by little more than $1 billion from ARRA funds (TANF Emergency) that run out in September.

A stealth public jobs program with many names and program variations run by states. It took some prodding for states to even draw down this money. Jobs, private employment, etc. -- varying models. We need an evaluation or two to capture how this was done, relatively quickly, and its effects. And it was targetted to low-income.

This is certainly not enough but what a great start.

Jobs Machine

"Ain't no hiring. And ain't likely to be any for a good long time."

Harold Meyerson, "End of the jobs machine," The Washington Post, July 28, 2010.

Several things stand out for me about this statement. First, it's untrue. Second, there's no denying the job market is bad and that many have been unemployed for six months or more. Third, business is making money from slashing jobs and other costs, but this is hardly a sustainable business strategy. And fourth, Meyerson has few policy prescriptions to offer except another go at an infrastructure bank and an oblique reference to green business tax credits.

Not a pretty picture, even for an op-ed page.

Myth Busting

"1)Unemployed benefits make people less likely to find jobs.
4)The private sector can take care of unemployed on its own
5)The unemployment rate gives us a good sense of how many people are affected by the downturn."

Heidi Shierholz, "Five Myths about unemployment," The Washington Post, July 25, 2010.

Unmasking these myths shows that there will be millions of people looking for jobs for some time. This is not a short-term problem. Unemployment benefits is certainly a key part of the response, which also includes economic development, new industry development, wage subsidies, training and skills, and OJT. Another conclusion might be that we need to reconsider public jobs for targeted populations. I heard an official from HHS last week say that $4 billion out of $5 billion of TANF Emergency Funds that have been drawn down as part of ARRA is being used by states for public, subsidized employment, some 200,000 jobs, the largest public jobs program since CETA. DOL will be rolling out a much smaller amount, some $50 million, for transitional jobs in the next year. That's a good start.

Polling Massage

"Thread No. 1: Climate is out; green jobs are in. Despite climate change being the greatest challenge of our time, with millions of people facing inundation, starvation and conflicts over scarce resources, the White House directed advocates not to discuss it."

Lee Wasserman, "Four Ways to Kill a Climate Bill," The New York Times, July 26, 2010.

The grand polling massage: the greatest challenge of our time versus the what's on my mind challenge and the how do we keeping explaining all these wars challenge.

"...[G]iven the polling, they [advocates] should avoid talking about climate change and focus on green jobs and energy independence."

The problem is that green jobs leads down the path of definition and 'oops' where are those jobs. And energy independence rhetoric gets fogged up with lower prices and the BP debacle.

Climate change is big, scary and needs to be talked about, understood, acted upon. Maybe we should learn how to have an in-depth civic conversation about big challenges before we undermine ourselves with legislative chatter and stalemate.

Prison Olympics

"Justice is harsher in America than in any other rich country. Between 2.3m and 2.4m Americans are behind bars, roughly one in every 100 adults. If those on parole or probation are included,one adult in 31 is under 'correctional supervision.'"

The Economist, "Too many laws, too many prisoners," July 24, 2010.

With 748 inmates per 100,000 in population, we rank above Russia (600), Iran (250), and China (140).

"Jail is expensive. Spending per prisoner ranges from $18,000 a year in Mississippi to $50,000 in Californion..."

More prisoners doesn't make us safer, and there are many interventions that would make us safer and reduce the number of prisoners.

If good sense and a belief in human rights doesn't lead to reform, severed budget pressures will.

Green Model Building

"Green Pays will offer financing to low-to-moderate-income homeowners to carry out energy efficiency retrofits or solar installations on their homes. Initial targets for the pilot phase are 500 homes retrofitted and 50 high-quality green jobs created."

Working Partnerships USA, Green Jobs, Green Communities: Models and Opportunities from Silicon Valley, July 2010.

Great idea to break into the private marketplace and create good jobs. Short write ups like this inspire curiosity.

1) How does this pilot relate, if at all, to ARRA and regular weatherization funding? Seems like a similar target group -- although I suspect it pushes the boundary on income upward.

2) Is there long-term interest in other repayment mechanisms--utility or property tax bills?

3) Is the $2 million fund revolving or will it have to be replenished from other sources? What ideas do you have for other financing sources? Current financing allows for 500 retrofits of $4,000. That seems on the inexpensive side. What will be the length of this next phase?

4) Who will do outreach and administer the financing? Are people lined up for this or will active marketing be required?

Looks promising, doesn't overreach -- but focused on showing a self sustaining model. That's what we need.

Brainstorming?

"Brainstorming...has been proven not to work since 1958, when Yale researchers found that the technique actually reduced a team's creative output: the same number of people generate more and better ideas separately than together."

Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman, "The Creativity Crisis," Newsweek, July 19, 2010.

Does this mean no more break out groups, no more flip charts, no more multi-colored stickies? What about collective wisdom? Collaborative genius? What about the mixed approach of working individually for five minutes doing your own brainstorming and then sharing?

I think we need to look more closely at the research cited in this provocative sidebar. Are we prepared to throw out brainstorming without more of a fight?

Here's another one: "Don't tell someone to be creative." Instead: "Do something only you would come up with -- that none of your friends or family would think of." Does that really work?

Imagination Stirring

"Instead, the city will be part of a super-region competing with areas like China and Brazil."

Tom Hundley, "Chicago Draws Up Plan to Prosper in 2040," The New York Times, July 16, 2010.

So, what's different from right now. I like the "competing with areas like China and Brazil." They are countries, I think. And Chicago going head-to-head with China seems like a big stretch. Why not pick a couple of regions. Even with 2 million more people, Chicago will be, comparatively speaking, a middling-sized region. And I think we'll need more than a new underground commuter station downtown. Yes, it would be good if Chicago maintained its historic role in rail freight --maybe the TIGER grant will help.

I guess I'll just have to read the plan -- there is more swooning over Daniel Burnham than details about how to rev up the Chicago economy and spread the benefits.

I wonder if this plan will "stir any imaginations."

Conflicting News

"Hundreds of thousands of Americans have enrolled in federally financed training programs in recent years, only to remain out of work. That has intensified skepticism about training as a cure for unemployment."

Peter S. Goodman, "After Training, Still Scrambling for Employment," The New York Times, July 19, 2010.

It's amazing what different people will read into this article -- bad news in the economy, false promises of employment and training, model programs, jobs in specific sectors, bad data, big investments, misplaced optimism. You get it all -- and the article's mostly about dislocated workers. Not much said about younger workers who are having trouble getting an initial foothold in the economy.

Unfortunately, all of the above are true to some degree. Training cannot solve a down economy -- but skilled workers are needed for new industries and occupations. Training has to be more targeted than ever.

On the other hand, go get that postsecondary credential: "...[By] 2018...we will need at least 4.7 million new workers with postsecondary education."

Anthony Carnevale,Nicole Smith, and jeff Strohl, Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education Requirements Through 2018, Georgetown Center on Education and the Workforce, June 2010.

Bad Example

"Mavericks are only cute when they're Mel Gibson."

Tana French,The Faithful

Of course it's only one character speaking, but Tana French's latest novel obviously went to press before Mel's latest drunken meltdown. Of course, it's been quite clear for some time that Mel is neither cute or a maverick -- unless maverick means enslavement to an anti-semitic cult. I don't think so: gone are the days of Mad Max, etc.

What should an author do? Well, inevitably things slip through but a little fact checking never hurts -- think of it as embarrasment prevention -- especially for books with detectives, however wounded.

Not So Quick

"There are good reasons to create green jobs, but they have more to do with green than jobs...There is no reason on Earthy to think that spending money on green jobs is more effective than spending on other things."

Alan Blinder, quoted in: Michael D. Shear and Steven Mufson, "Obama holds fast to clean energy," The Washington Post, July 13, 2010

Lot of comparisons to green and the Internet and the long run, not much mention of short-term green jobs, energy efficiency, retrofit, etc.

"..loans and grants extended under the Recovery Act...have the potential to 'stand up" new industries that could employ thousands of Americans by 2015."

This is the kind of slow, targeted, business-focused economic development that needs to occur. Although "Blinder says that imposing a carbon tax...would do more to create green jobs."

On a happy note: "There is so much deman for the clean-energy tax credits that the program is oversubscribed."

Abundant Mantra

"We have been discussing a way for families and neighbors together to create that part of life that systems can never provide. And this life is created from abundance of our gifts, the expansion of our associations, and our willingness to extend an invitation to those we have not known."

Peter Block and John McKnight,The Abundant Community

In some ways I wish this book had started with this premise, elaborated it a bit, and then gone on to show how families and neighbors have translated these ideas and apsirations into action. Instead, most of the book is about deficits, the realities of living today in the US, and the evils of consumer society and systems. We don't get much history or an analysis of the pros and cons of progress -- and what lies ahead.

The Abundant Community reads much like an ideological script, a self-help mantra, a denunciation of sin. At its core, it's a stump speech that can be (and probably has been) been given over and over again -- and always remains sort of fresh. What's surprising to me is that after twenty or so years of promosting these ideas, publishing the big green book, etc., we don't have a better set of examples about where this approach has worked in some significant way. Has it made a difference?

All that said, the asset-based approach remains a powerful critique of the way we think about people and communities, not necessarily the economy. And its promotion of gifts, associations, and hospitality is a simple, common sense, compelling approach for building community in a time when our social fabric is frayed. Showing how this approach is relevant in our new, emerging world would have been a better target for the book.

Scarcity Abundance?

"This prosperity comes from operating in a local economy. An economy based significantly on barter and local resources. We use our money and capacities to support the local economy. Call it a citizen economy, one based on gifts and local abundance."

Peter Block and John McKnight, The Abundant Community

As usual, at first read this seems preposterous. In this day and age in the U.S., how much economic activity, goods and services, could be generated in neighborhoods, assuming a current level of quality of life? They even embrace the marketplace in this riff, the local marketplace, that is, as if "local" cleanses market functioning of all the bad stuff.

This question is not so preposterous if we introduce a changed variable or condition that they equate with the Devil -- scarcity. (The basis of bad economic thinking according to Block and McKnight). What if our economic recovery is forever slow? What if our role in the world economy diminishes? Might we turn to forgotten forms of association, household production, self sufficiency? We've become a nation of frugal savers again, so anything is possible.

There we go, the abundant community seems more likely when scarcity shows its face, when deficits reign.

Mysterious Answers

"Mystery is the answer to the unknown. In actualizing its abundance, a community welcomes mystery, for that is a catalyst for creativity. Mystery gives us freedom from the burden of answers. Answers are just a restatement of the past."

Peter Block and John McKnight,The Abundant Community

I know I may be yanking these quotations out of contexts that make them a lot more sensible than they seem. I'm trying not to do that, but...

What do we make of this logic; "Mystery is the answer....; Mystery gives us freedom from...answers; and answers are ...a restatement of the past." As you will remember from past readings, answers are bad. Mystery is both an answer and freedom from answers -- or a bit of a non-answer. And, of course, answers just restate the past, which, I guess is bad.

Yet, a key argument in the book is that the past holds answers -- community competence, etc -- from the present and future. We need to relearn ways of recognizing and building upon our community assets.

So, the authors have got us might confused. For my part, I believe firmly in the mystery of the universe and that we can have some, not all, answers.

Market Bashing

"What's more,our dependency on the marketplace devalues the nobility of human existence."

Peter Block and John McNight,The Abundant Community

So many quotes to choose from. It feels a bit jarring to juxtapose "dependency, marketplace, nobility, human existence." Is human existence noble? Block and McKnight haven't made the case yet; in fact, the opposite seems to be true given that consumerism, systems, and the marketplace are human creations. Unfortunately, they equate "marketplace" with consumerism, overindulgence, lack of local production and self sufficiency, extreme "market values," etc. But the marketplace is essentially the voluntary exchange of goods and services -- a human invention that has served us well for a very long time. We've invented various ways to protect market exchanges -- sometimes they work, sometimes they don't. Local production, local enterprises still require markets.

Their point, it seems, is that we have given up (assuming we've had them) personal and community competencies in exchange for buying too many solutions in the marketplace. Of course, we could refuse to buy these solutions, but this is challenging when they become so overwhelming, cheap, the thing to do. How do we create a balance between family and community, the marketplace, and government. We may get to this, I hope, but they are throwing lots of things out the window along the way.

Demand Please!

"Inadequate consumer demand was far and away the most important obstacle to growth for green businesses. Seventy-onepercent of all respondents cited a lack of demand from consumers, while 40 percent referenced a lack of demand from businesses, and 19 percent lack of demand from government."

SF Works Green Business Survey, 2010

Don't you love business -- so straightforward? We can't grow unless their is consumer demand, consumers, businesses, government entities that will buy our products and services. Rhetoric won't do it, hopeful thinking won't do it -- somebody has to be willing to buy.

I've always thought that we got it backwards on green -- training before economic development -- and a focus on jobs rather than businesses. If there isn't consumer demand for business products and services, they don't demand new workers and expanded hours for existing workers. That's the way it works in the end.

Obviously, lots of folks have been working on the policy frameworks needed to create the demand -- and promising successes. We just need more -- and success that breaks into the private market.

No Answers?

"Anytime you speak of answers, you are making a false promise. The more important dimensions of being human have no clear answer. This means that the answers systems claim they can provide are counterfeit."

Peter Block and John McKnight,The Abundant Community

I'm sure I have ripped this quote out of its very important context, yet it still seems to me to represent a strange logic. I think we would all agree that we don't have answers to many important questions and that many dimensions of the human condition and spirit are not reducible to simplistic answers. I think we would also agree that the claims of many systems, services, products, and hucksters are false or no more than half truths.

But there are answers. And I do get helpful answers from my osteopath, car mechanic, kid's school teachers, soccer coaches, camp counselors, etc. Sometimes their answers evolve over time as they get more information; sometimes they are right the first time.

There certainly are systems that seem to do more harm than good in the name of having answers and doing good. It's the authors' propensity for wild generalization that is so troubling -- and then the apology several pages later that they didn't mean that all services or professionals are bad or that markets are completely horrible.

I wish they had started the book by saying, as other authors have, that we face a challenge of abundance and bureaucratic organization that have created better living conditions for the many,but have also weakened communities, personal responsibility, and self sufficiency. Without giving up all that we have gained, how do we restore, enhance these key dimensions, community competence, for example? Aren't they offering answers?

Neighborhood Economics?

"Strong local neighborhood connections spawn new enterprises, sustain them through the years, and provide primary access to employment."

Peter Block and John McKnight,The Abundant Community

"Strawn local neighborhood connections spawn new enterprises." That's probably true, especially micro-businesses for ethnic communities with specialized markets. The connections are about access to customers, understanding of products and services, inputs, workers, maybe some capital. I'm not sure this statement means much for larger new enterprises

"...sustain them through the years." Given above, yes, but many businesses, to survive, need to broaden markets beyond comfort zone. Neighborhood connections in other neighborhoods may matter -- but I suspect knowledge and connections into larger world are more important. Market expansion of this kind is critical for the job creation side of things.

"... and provide primary access to employment." Informal, weak-tied social networks are not the same as neighborhood networks although they overlap. A neighorhood with high unemployment may not yield many job referrals -- or job referrals may not be to good jobs.

Maybe we'll get to this, assuming I read faster, but I also think neighborhood may have a new role, a reinvigorated role in the the future, not just a return to the past. I'm thinking of the household and community production that may be needed as U.S. economy changes, maybe diminishes in terms of quality of life, and the opportunities for energy efficiency, self sufficiency. My gut tells me that a lot of this book would be more effective if it focused on rebuilding community/family for this future rather than just getting caught up in a "death of community" lament.

Death of Community

"What this means is that the space that the family and community were designed to fill has been sold and is now empty."

Peter Block and John McKnight,The Abundant Community

Statements like this drive me crazy. Designed by whom? Sold and empty? The space? What's the evidence? How do we understand the changing roles of family and community over time in different economic and social circumstances?. Surely, they have changed, but all for the worse? No redeeming qualities? How do we grapple with and improve upon the changes that economic well-being and opportunity have afforded in many countries -- food, health care, increased labor force participation by women, less child labor, less grueling housework?

I get the point about what we have lost. But oddly, a book that is supposedly focused on "assets" spends a lot of time dwelling on "deficits" -- what is wrong with family and community, for example. And the authors spend little time on the challenges that their families and communities in action presented for real people. Not all pretty, as we know.

The asset approach is a powerful way of looking at the world and taking action for its improvement. I hope The Abundant Community doesn't become another "death of community" rant.

Word Play

"A consumer is one who has surrended to others the power to provide what is essential for a full and satisfied life. This act of surrender goes by many names: client, patient, student, audience, fan, shopper. All customers, not citizens. Consumerism is not about shopping, but about the transformation of citizens into consumers."

Peter Block and John McKnight, The Abundant Community

There's a good point here -- about empowerment, choice, authority, etc -- but the words ultimately get in the way. For example, it's hard not to see citizens as consumers in electoral politics -- fed some programmed stuff, offered few real choices. Now, what's the voting rate? And isn't the challenge to turn consumers into citiznes? On the other hand, many use the word customer in the business, public, and nonprofit worlds to suggest accountability, focus, choice, empowerment, etc. Political scientists hate this word, but choice is a powerful thing and much needed.

And why are students equated with consumers? Isn't learning the heart of citizenship.
I won't say anything about the aspersions caste on fans.