Showing posts with label safety. Show all posts
Showing posts with label safety. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 17, 2013

TREASURIES-Prices gain as stock slump spurs safety bid






TREASURIES-Prices gain as stock slump spurs safety bid

Tuesday, April 2, 2013

How did the social safety net get its name?


Once President Obama unveils his budget next week as he’s expected to do, Congress will be looking at three very different proposals to tangle over. And one of the stickiest issues will involve how much to spend on that thing we call government “safety net” programs. 


But how did that phrase– the safety net– become a household term for social programs in the first place? 


You’d assume a historian would know the answer.  But when if you start calling them up to ask, no one does.  So, we enlisted a few to help figure it out.  The result is a surprising etymology of a slippery phrase that goes from FDR to Ronald Reagan, and his speech that launched a thousand safety net metaphors– from “shredding” to “catching” — even as he questioned who really deserved to be caught in that net.



Check out the history of the safety net, as it appears in political cartoons, in the photo slideshow above.


Latest Stories on Marketplace.org




How did the social safety net get its name?

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

Flying with a net, literal and figurative


In the coming months, as our lawmakers wrangle over the federal budget, we’ll be hearing a lot of debate around the safety net. Who it should catch? How big or bouncy should it be? Who should pay for it?


We figured a good way to launch a discussion about that safety net, which is of course, a metaphoric safety net, would be to try out an actual safety net.  


And that brought me to a platform, 30 feet in the air, in Richie Gaona’s backyard.


A woman on a trapeze platform at Gaonas Trapeze Workshop in Woodland Hills, Calif.


Gaona runs a trapeze school out of his house in Woodland Hills, Calif. I’d asked him to give me a sort of “Safety Net 101.” Of course, if I was going to learn how to fall, first I had to learn how to fly. Which meant that I was also getting a crash course in trapeze.   


Before I climbed up the ladder, I wanted to know exactly what was going to be catching me, so I asked Gaona to give me a tour of his safety net. It’s made of nylon. It’s 55 feet long and 12 feet wide. And, sure, it’s an obvious question, but I wanted to know exactly what the point of the net was:


Gaona laughed.


“It’s for when we do tricks, we have the confidence to  do all those tricks and not worry about dying.”



If you talk to public policy wonks, instead of acrobats, you actually get a very similar definition.


“Safety nets are there to ensure that there’s a basic floor that provides resources for everyone’s survival,” said Celeste Watkins-Hayes, a sociologist from Northwestern University.


Of course safety nets — real and metaphoric — cost money. A real one, according to Gaona, the trapeze teacher, goes for about $ 5,000. The cost of a metaphoric safety net is obviously much, much more. And that’s where a lot of the debate comes in.   


On the one hand, there are the kind of concerns that Watkins-Hayes has, that “resources for low income families often end up on the chopping block when there are conversations about budget cuts.”


On the other hand, there are concerns like Richard Burkhauser’s, an economist at Cornell and a fellow with the American Enterprise Institute.  


“Moneys from the social safety net do not come from heaven.  They come from taxes,” he said.  ”Americans believe that anyone who works hard and plays by the rules shouldn’t be poor, but we basically made too many promises based on the taxes that are there to provide for them, and we have to make some decisions about how to balance those systems.”


Which brings us to the subject of “bounce.”


Richie Gaona says the best safety nets have a little bounce, which makes them safer, and softer to fall in to.  As one of Richie Gaona’s youngest acrobats, Gabby, explained a, it can feel like “gigantic bed, like a hammock.”



But Gaona’s got a class to run, so no one gets to stay in the net too long.  


Richard Burkhauser, the economist from Cornell, said getting people out of the metaphoric safety net is important, too.  He applauds the welfare reforms of the 1990s that emphasized work incentives and put time limits on many forms of cash assistance.  He says other programs could benefit from similar changes.


“It nudged people in to the workforce, which is what society expected of them” said Burkhauser.


That’s of course controversial — but controversy is woven in to the safety net. Metaphoric nets, and real. Richie Gaona, the trapeze artists, pointed to the issue of going wihtout a net. Turns out, it only happens in the movies. But in real life, acrobats always use a net. It’s just that you can’t always see them. “Some nets are black, so they blend in with the audience,” said Gaona.


In the same way, government safety net programs can also be invisible, said Suzanne Mettler, author of “The Submerged State.”


“It’s really a bit of smoke and mirrors,” Mettler said. “Usually, when people think of the safety net, they think of policies for the poor,” or elderly or disabled. But, she says there is a less obvious safety net that helps middle class and wealthier people.  Things like Tax deductions on mortgage interest, that reward home owners but not renters.  Deductions on college savings accounts that go to people who can afford to save for college. Mettler says many tax credits and deductions are actually social policies in disguise, which are designed so that they “obscure government’s role in helping people out to do particular things.”


Another funny thing about safety nets? If you’ve always had one underneath you, they’re easy to take for granted. Since Richie Gaona grew up in a circus family, the Flying Gaonas, he is fearless. He knows the net will catch him.


“To me, it doesn’t even click that it’s there. Because it’s been there all my life,” he said.


Celeste Watkins Hayes, from Northwestern said a similar phenomenon happens with people who grew up in well-off families. 


“Getting assistance from parents to buy the first home, help paying for college, those kinds of thingscreate an invsible private safety net so that if you do fall into hard times you’ve got a wealth of assets you can call upon to protect you,” she said.  


Which brings me back to that 30-foot platform in Gaona’s backyard, where I was definitely not taking the safety net for granted. With visions of too many kinds of safety nets flying through my head, I looked down at the actual one, meant to save me.


I jumped for the trapeze bar. I screamed. But I did manage to hold on. I flipped upside down, reached for the outstretched arms of my catcher, and…


I missed. The first time.


But I never would have tried, if I didn’t have that net.



Watch a video of Krissy flying at the Trapeze Workshop here. And tell us what your safety net looks like, what you’ve had to do when times get tough.


Latest Stories on Marketplace.org




Flying with a net, literal and figurative

PODCAST: Home prices rise, safety net flies


New numbers out this morning show home prices are up by 8.1 percent over last year, the best yearly increase since 2006. Juli Niemann, analyst with Smith, Moore & Company explains whether the rise will boost the job market.


One woman’s definition of a safety net: Something that lets you take risks, from going to school to flying from a trapeze. And tell us, what does your safety net look like?


However the Supreme Court decides two cases on same-sex marriage, some Republican PAC’s are prepared to back candidates who support gay marriage.


Latest Stories on Marketplace.org




PODCAST: Home prices rise, safety net flies

Show me your (real and metaphoric) safety net

What does your safety net look like? What has caught you when you’ve stumbled — or helped you feel financially secure enough to take a leap? Today, we launch an occasional series we’re calling Show Me Your Safety Net.  In this first installment, we meet Mercedes Gallup. 


This is not the first time Mercedes Gallup has exposed a part of her safety net. She still remembers the stares she would get, 20-years ago, when she would pull out her food stamps at the grocery store. 


“Back then you held up the line when you were using food stamps,” she remembers.  “They had to check everything and they were paper — it was like a little book of Disneyland cards.


Sometimes, Gallup says she would feel judged. “But I had to feed my kid,” she says. “So I’ll hold up the line all day. I was a single mom, I was in nursing school, and had a job. And it just was not enough to cover food.”


But in the three years that Gallup was on food stamps, they didn’t just help her cover food. Gallup says  they provided her a safety net that allowed her to take risks she otherwise wouldn’t have taken. Risks she believes have paid off. 


Now, she is a public health nurse at a state college in Southern California, with a good salary and benefits, which provided her another kind of safety net, when she had breast cancer a few years ago. Gallup has recovered. And these days, she has the time and money to take new risks.


You see, Mercedes Gallup uses yet a third kind of safety net now. A literal one. Because when she’s not working, she is a trapeze artist. Her coworkers call her “The Flying Nurse.”


One recent morning, I went to the Trapeze School in Woodland Hills, CA, where she trains.  I watched her fly through the air. Sometimes she’d do somersaults.  Sometimes, she’d miss, and fall. But she was always ok. The net caught her.


After her last trick, once she’d climbed out of the net, she mentioned in passing that even though her old food stamps have long expired, she still has some — $ 65 worth.  She keeps them in an envelope with other important papers. 


“I definitely have a healthy respect for the net,” Gallup tells me.  Literal, and metaphoric.


Up next in our series:  Krissy Clark gets a crash course in safety nets real and metaphoric….when she learns to fly on a trapeze.


 


Latest Stories on Marketplace.org




Show me your (real and metaphoric) safety net

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

Two years after Fukushima disaster, doubts of food safety linger in Japan

In Japan, people call it 3-11. It’s shorthand for the tsunami and nuclear accident two years ago. The disaster left behind devastation that may never be completely cleaned up. Tens of thousands of people still can’t go home. People are still missing. And people are still afraid of radioactive contamination. Japan’s government insists the food supply is safe. But some people have made big changes in their eating habits.

David Wagner has lived in Japan for almost 30 years. He loves Japanese food. But these days, he gets groceries at a store that sells imported foods. In the store, he says, “So I buy my granola here … and the reason I’ll take this is, it’s from Germany.”

Wagner doesn’t want to leave Japan. He’s got good work here as a business communication consultant. But after the nuclear accident, he started a Facebook page on food safety. He stopped eating mushrooms, because they absorb radiation. If he wants fish — here in the land of sushi — he mail-orders it, canned.

“I just do not eat the fish in Japan anymore,” he says. “They can’t test all the fish.”

Fish is still popular in Japanese restaurants and groceries, but uncertainty about food is widespread among the Japanese. Some people even use private testing services.

Customers come to this Tokyo shop for organic cotton towels and hand-dipped candles — and also to use the radiation detectors. There are two of them in back.

Hidetake Ishimaru set up shop here after the disaster, checking food for radiation at 3,000 yen a test — about $ 32. Samples fill a shelf: “Brown rice and soybeans, white rice … that is seaweed, I think,” he says.

The Japanese government says the country’s rice is safe to eat. But customer Yuki Yanagase is skeptical. Ishimaru translates for her: “I don’t believe it. So I’m gathering many informations from Internet.”

The Internet’s full of scientific studies and conspiracy theories about radiation — what you might expect when a danger is invisible and hard to understand. If your job is to try to explain things to the public, good luck.

Dr. Shuichiro Hayashi works on crisis management for the food safety division of the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare. Hayashi says after 3-11, Japan set such strict limits for radiation that you could eat food contaminated at that level every day and be just fine. Japan allows much less radiation in food than the U.S. or Europe.

His colleague in the Ministry of Agriculture, Mitsuhiro Doishita, says the government tested 10 million bags of rice from Fukushima in 2012, and only 71 were over the limit.

Many people told me they’re reassured by these measures. Wakako Yamane is an interpreter at an ad agency, stopping by McDonalds for coffee before work. She was worried about food right after the accident …

“Today I’m not concerned at all,” she says. “Some people are. I’m not. I just want to continue the way we’ve been living and I think we’re all right.”

This may be a case of what David Wagner calls radiation fatigue. He says you get tired of being vigilant about food. When we had lunch one day, he had a salad — something he wouldn’t have done a year ago. But he wasn’t sure he should.

“From everything I read, nobody can say definitively or non-definitively that it’s safe or not safe, and that’s what’s confusing for people like me,” he says.

Research about radiation is confusing. A new World Health Organization report on the Fukushima disaster says people are not at risk of health effects unless they were in the most contaminated areas. But the report acknowledges the limits of the research it relies on: Studies tend to look at people with higher levels of exposure — such as atomic bomb survivors. The long-term effects of low-level exposure are not as well known.

So some people figure — why take a chance? On yourself maybe, but what if you have kids?

Two-year-old Karera Tani demonstrates the English he’s learning in kindergarten. The Tani family lives in Chiba, near Tokyo. When the nuclear plant 130 miles away started spewing radiation, they fled to Osaka. They’re back now, but they buy drinking water from Hawaii. They use a grocery delivery service that tests food for radiation. Karera’s mom, Momo Tani, is a doctor. She says the high grocery bill is worth it, for her son’s health.

“Well, with things that aren’t supposed to be there like cesium, even if it’s under the limit it’s there, and you never know what the effect will be if it accumulates.”

Tani worries about the research that shows that children are particularly vulnerable to exposure to radiation. A lot of parents told me they aren’t concerned about their own diets, but they’re careful about what their kids eat. Many of them told me they feel bad for not supporting the farmers in the disaster region, but they’re buying their rice from Kyushu, far away from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant.

Latest Stories on Marketplace.org


Two years after Fukushima disaster, doubts of food safety linger in Japan

Thursday, March 7, 2013

Safety board says will issue report on Boeing 787 probe Thursday

Damaged batteries are seen on a screen during a news conference on an investigation into the January 7 fire that occurred on a Japan Airlines Boeing 787 at Logan International Airport in Boston, in Washington February 7, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Yuri Gripas


Reuters: Business News


Safety board says will issue report on Boeing 787 probe Thursday

Monday, March 4, 2013

Obama renews offer to cut social safety nets

A worker cleans a sidewalk outside the White House in Washington March 2, 2013. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas

1 of 5. A worker cleans a sidewalk outside the White House in Washington March 2, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Yuri Gripas

WASHINGTON | Sun Mar 3, 2013 10:48pm EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama raised anew the issue of cutting entitlements such as Medicare and Social Security as a way out of damaging budget cuts, a White House official said on Sunday, as both sides in Washington tried to limit a fiscal crisis that may soon hit millions of Americans.

Signaling he might be ready to explore a compromise to end automatic spending cuts that began late Friday, Obama mentioned reforming these entitlement programs in calls with lawmakers from both parties on Saturday afternoon.

“He’s reaching out to Democrats who understand we have to make serious progress on long-term entitlement reform and Republicans who realize that if we had that type of entitlement reform, they’d be willing to have tax reform that raises revenues to lower the deficit,” White House senior economic official Gene Sperling said on Sunday on the CNN program “State of the Union.”

Republicans have long argued that the only way to tame budget deficits over the long haul is by slowing the cost of sprawling social safety net programs.

These include the Social Security retirement program and Medicare and Medicaid healthcare programs for the elderly, disabled and poor that are becoming more expensive as a large segment of the U.S. population hits retirement age.

While Obama also has proposed some savings on these programs, he has insisted that significant new tax revenues be part of the deficit-reduction formula, an idea Republicans so far reject.

Budget fights in Congress took their most serious turn in years on Friday when $ 85 billion in indiscriminate spending cuts known as “sequestration” began to kick in after both parties failed to agree on how to stop them.

Democrats predict the automatic cuts could soon cause air-traffic delays, meat shortages as food safety inspections slow down, and hundreds of thousands of furloughs for federal workers.

As the budget battles rage on in Washington, sources said Obama plans to nominate on Monday Sylvia Mathews Burwell to head to White House Office of Management and Budget. A veteran of the Bill Clinton White House, Burwell is president of the Walmart Foundation, which handles the corporation’s charitable efforts.

Neither Sperling nor White House spokesmen would provide further details on Obama’s conversations on Saturday with members of Congress, and they did not identify the lawmakers to whom the president spoke.

Obama’s mention of entitlement reform may help bring Republicans to the table to halt the cuts. Republican leaders also made soothing noises on Sunday about the need to avoid a government shutdown on March 27, when funding runs out for most federal programs.

BOEHNER’S MAXIMUM EFFORT

House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner, interviewed on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” said he “absolutely” would do whatever it takes to keep the government operating. Toward that end, he will seek House passage this week of a “continuing resolution” to fund the government through September 30, when the fiscal year ends.

Lately, some rank-and-file Democrats and Republicans have been sending signals that they are willing to compromise to end a two-year-old deadlock over tax and entitlement reforms.

Last week, conservative Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said he was open to raising $ 600 billion in new tax revenue if Democrats accepted significant changes to Medicare and Medicaid as part of a long-term budget deal.

A few days later, liberal Democratic Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland told Reuters that he had discussed with Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid the possibility of replacing the automatic spending cuts with a mix of entitlement reforms and tax increases.

“Democrats know we have to do entitlement reforms and Republicans know they have to do revenues (increases),” Cardin said.

Now that they are in place, the $ 85 billion in spending cuts must be carried out by September 30 if no alternative is found. Half of those cuts would hit the military with the rest scattered over thousands of other domestic programs.

Economists have warned that such a heavy dose of belt tightening over such a short period will slow U.S. economic growth and potentially cost 750,000 jobs.

Speaking of the search for alternatives, Boehner said on “Meet the Press:” “I don’t think anyone quite understands how it gets resolved.”

No matter how Obama and Congress resolve the 2013 battle, this round of automatic spending cuts is only one of a decade’s worth of annual cuts totaling $ 1.2 trillion mandated by the sequestration law.

DEEP DIVISIONS STILL

Deep divisions between Democrats and Republicans have soured previous negotiations.

Slamming the door on Democrats’ demands for new tax hikes, Boehner said that Obama “got $ 650 billion of higher taxes on the American people on January the first. How much more does he want?” He was referring to the higher tax rate that began in the new year on households making more than $ 450,000 a year.

“It’s time for the president and Senate Democrats to get serious about the long-term spending problem that we have,” Boehner said.

In the meantime, both Democrats and Republicans were hoping to win the immediate fight over the automatic spending cuts so that they are best positioned in any upcoming battles over long-term budget deficits.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell on Sunday played down the severity of the automatic cuts, describing them as modest.

“We’re willing to talk to him (Obama) about reconfiguring the same amount of spending reduction over the next six months,” McConnell said on CNN. “The American people look at this and say: ‘Gee, I’ve had to cut my budget more than this,’ – probably on numerous occasions over the last four years because we’ve had such a tepid economy now for four long years.”

At the heart of Washington’s persistent fiscal crises is disagreement over how to slash the budget deficit and gain control of the $ 16.7 trillion national debt, bloated over the years by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and government stimulus for the ailing economy.

Government red ink also rose over the last decade after the enactment of across-the-board tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 secured by President George W. Bush.

(Additional reporting by Will Dunham and Philip Barbara; Editing by Alistair Bell, Philip Barbara and Eric Beech)



Reuters: Economic News


Obama renews offer to cut social safety nets

Sunday, March 3, 2013

Obama renews budget offer to cut social safety nets

A worker cleans a sidewalk outside the White House in Washington March 2, 2013. REUTERS/Yuri Gripas

1 of 5. A worker cleans a sidewalk outside the White House in Washington March 2, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Yuri Gripas

WASHINGTON | Sun Mar 3, 2013 10:48pm EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama raised anew the issue of cutting entitlements such as Medicare and Social Security as a way out of damaging budget cuts, a White House official said on Sunday, as both sides in Washington tried to limit a fiscal crisis that may soon hit millions of Americans.

Signaling he might be ready to explore a compromise to end automatic spending cuts that began late Friday, Obama mentioned reforming these entitlement programs in calls with lawmakers from both parties on Saturday afternoon.

“He’s reaching out to Democrats who understand we have to make serious progress on long-term entitlement reform and Republicans who realize that if we had that type of entitlement reform, they’d be willing to have tax reform that raises revenues to lower the deficit,” White House senior economic official Gene Sperling said on Sunday on the CNN program “State of the Union.”

Republicans have long argued that the only way to tame budget deficits over the long haul is by slowing the cost of sprawling social safety net programs.

These include the Social Security retirement program and Medicare and Medicaid healthcare programs for the elderly, disabled and poor that are becoming more expensive as a large segment of the U.S. population hits retirement age.

While Obama also has proposed some savings on these programs, he has insisted that significant new tax revenues be part of the deficit-reduction formula, an idea Republicans so far reject.

Budget fights in Congress took their most serious turn in years on Friday when $ 85 billion in indiscriminate spending cuts known as “sequestration” began to kick in after both parties failed to agree on how to stop them.

Democrats predict the automatic cuts could soon cause air-traffic delays, meat shortages as food safety inspections slow down, and hundreds of thousands of furloughs for federal workers.

As the budget battles rage on in Washington, sources said Obama plans to nominate on Monday Sylvia Mathews Burwell to head to White House Office of Management and Budget. A veteran of the Bill Clinton White House, Burwell is president of the Walmart Foundation, which handles the corporation’s charitable efforts.

Neither Sperling nor White House spokesmen would provide further details on Obama’s conversations on Saturday with members of Congress, and they did not identify the lawmakers to whom the president spoke.

Obama’s mention of entitlement reform may help bring Republicans to the table to halt the cuts. Republican leaders also made soothing noises on Sunday about the need to avoid a government shutdown on March 27, when funding runs out for most federal programs.

BOEHNER’S MAXIMUM EFFORT

House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner, interviewed on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” said he “absolutely” would do whatever it takes to keep the government operating. Toward that end, he will seek House passage this week of a “continuing resolution” to fund the government through September 30, when the fiscal year ends.

Lately, some rank-and-file Democrats and Republicans have been sending signals that they are willing to compromise to end a two-year-old deadlock over tax and entitlement reforms.

Last week, conservative Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said he was open to raising $ 600 billion in new tax revenue if Democrats accepted significant changes to Medicare and Medicaid as part of a long-term budget deal.

A few days later, liberal Democratic Senator Ben Cardin of Maryland told Reuters that he had discussed with Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid the possibility of replacing the automatic spending cuts with a mix of entitlement reforms and tax increases.

“Democrats know we have to do entitlement reforms and Republicans know they have to do revenues (increases),” Cardin said.

Now that they are in place, the $ 85 billion in spending cuts must be carried out by September 30 if no alternative is found. Half of those cuts would hit the military with the rest scattered over thousands of other domestic programs.

Economists have warned that such a heavy dose of belt tightening over such a short period will slow U.S. economic growth and potentially cost 750,000 jobs.

Speaking of the search for alternatives, Boehner said on “Meet the Press:” “I don’t think anyone quite understands how it gets resolved.”

No matter how Obama and Congress resolve the 2013 battle, this round of automatic spending cuts is only one of a decade’s worth of annual cuts totaling $ 1.2 trillion mandated by the sequestration law.

DEEP DIVISIONS STILL

Deep divisions between Democrats and Republicans have soured previous negotiations.

Slamming the door on Democrats’ demands for new tax hikes, Boehner said that Obama “got $ 650 billion of higher taxes on the American people on January the first. How much more does he want?” He was referring to the higher tax rate that began in the new year on households making more than $ 450,000 a year.

“It’s time for the president and Senate Democrats to get serious about the long-term spending problem that we have,” Boehner said.

In the meantime, both Democrats and Republicans were hoping to win the immediate fight over the automatic spending cuts so that they are best positioned in any upcoming battles over long-term budget deficits.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell on Sunday played down the severity of the automatic cuts, describing them as modest.

“We’re willing to talk to him (Obama) about reconfiguring the same amount of spending reduction over the next six months,” McConnell said on CNN. “The American people look at this and say: ‘Gee, I’ve had to cut my budget more than this,’ – probably on numerous occasions over the last four years because we’ve had such a tepid economy now for four long years.”

At the heart of Washington’s persistent fiscal crises is disagreement over how to slash the budget deficit and gain control of the $ 16.7 trillion national debt, bloated over the years by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and government stimulus for the ailing economy.

Government red ink also rose over the last decade after the enactment of across-the-board tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 secured by President George W. Bush.

(Additional reporting by Will Dunham and Philip Barbara; Editing by Alistair Bell, Philip Barbara and Eric Beech)



Reuters: Business News


Obama renews budget offer to cut social safety nets