INCLUSIVE TOWARDS THE INCLUSIONISTS. Despite my horror at this comment-less version of Tapped, I'm totally fascinated by the "poverty" vs. "inclusion" debate Mark explains below. My "power of thinking without thinking" reaction is to line up with those who want to talk about actual poverty rather than moving to what John Halpin calls "a hopelessly vague and confusing term grounded in sociological theory and 1970s French social activism." Oh, social policy SNAP! My favorite kind! But there's something to be said for making inclusion a complementary, rather than substitute, end goal. If we just transferred funds so the incomes of everyone in poor urban areas registered at a dollar above the poverty line, the problems would not be solved. The marginalization and isolation of these communities -- and, for that matter, of the poor from the mainstream of American life -- is distressing on many levels, and costly on more. Research commissioned by CAP and conducted by a trio of eminent economists found that child poverty costs the country nearly a half-trillion dollars yearly. But this drag comes from lost productivity, increased crime, and poor health, problems that are related more directly to social exclusion than low incomes. Fixes will have to include everything from better education to more economically mixed housing. So here's my takeaway: You have to engage the poverty fight. Particularly in the aftermath of welfare reform and Katrina, when poverty fighting means something different to the public than "giving money to undeserving black people." But the Left would do well to begin thinking more seriously about social inclusion as a policy goal, if not as a political framework (I don't think the middle class paqrticularly wants the poor included in their beighborhoods). I can't say I'm tremendously familiar with the Inclusionist.org folks, but their focus on "reframing" the poverty debate worries me, particularly when they recommend poverty-fighters focus on "powerful alternative frames" and suggest such midseason trades as "reducing inequality, rebuilding the middle class, and promoting social inclusion." That strikes me as far too reflexively fearful of conservatives, and far too likely to end up actually "rebuilding the middle class," which is an important goal, but not synonymous with reducing poverty. --Ezra Klein
