RE: What causes urban poverty

RE: What causes urban poverty (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

[Poll]

What causes urban poverty

Ethnic or social majorities/1%ers/corporations

11% (4)

Personal failures on the part of those so afflicted

27% (10)

Karma

0% (0)

An artful combination of the above

38% (14)

Other - please expand

22% (8)

Total Votes : 36

(last vote on : 3/27/2013 7:26:14 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

thompsonx -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/25/2013 6:40:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies quote: ORIGINAL: erieangel Try this on for size. Today's minimum wage is worth less in actual spending power than the minimum wage was worth in 1960. The poor, minimum wage earner, along with those on the margins, like myself, who make just above minimum wage, are worst off than ever before. And we have higher local taxes than ever before. this is not a personal attack, just saying....... you have a house, a car, a computer, internet connection, and I assume a mobile phone too., and probably a few other things sometimes people forget the meaning of poverty It would appear that your definition of poverty includes sleeping under a bridge and eating from a dumpster. How easily we can define ourselves out of poverty by listing the things that someone in bangledash has never heard of. If we compare poor americans to rich americans we get a truer picture but you do not seem interested in a true picture????what is it that you are interested in vis-a-vis this thread? I'm telling you...it's lack of money! That is a most accurate definition of the difference between the rich and the poor.

deathtothepixies -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/25/2013 6:40:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies quote: ORIGINAL: erieangel Try this on for size. Today's minimum wage is worth less in actual spending power than the minimum wage was worth in 1960. The poor, minimum wage earner, along with those on the margins, like myself, who make just above minimum wage, are worst off than ever before. And we have higher local taxes than ever before. this is not a personal attack, just saying....... you have a house, a car, a computer, internet connection, and I assume a mobile phone too., and probably a few other things sometimes people forget the meaning of poverty It would appear that your definition of poverty includes sleeping under a bridge and eating from a dumpster. How easily we can define ourselves out of poverty by listing the things that someone in bangledash has never heard of. If we compare poor americans to rich americans we get a truer picture but you do not seem interested in a true picture????what is it that you are interested in vis-a-vis this thread? you are putting words in my mouth but I think you have shown your true colours with your deliberate spelling of "Bangledash" as opposed to the country known as Bangladesh. The question of urban poverty will never be answered on a forum like this that so often becomes pathetically pureile, as you have so clearly demonstrated, all I was pointing out was that sometimes we, in the western world, need to have a look at the billions of people who are in genuine poverty before moaning about our supposed poverty. Feel free to answer the OP now

thompsonx -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/25/2013 7:02:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies quote: ORIGINAL: erieangel Try this on for size. Today's minimum wage is worth less in actual spending power than the minimum wage was worth in 1960. The poor, minimum wage earner, along with those on the margins, like myself, who make just above minimum wage, are worst off than ever before. And we have higher local taxes than ever before. this is not a personal attack, just saying....... you have a house, a car, a computer, internet connection, and I assume a mobile phone too., and probably a few other things sometimes people forget the meaning of poverty It would appear that your definition of poverty includes sleeping under a bridge and eating from a dumpster. How easily we can define ourselves out of poverty by listing the things that someone in bangledash has never heard of. If we compare poor americans to rich americans we get a truer picture but you do not seem interested in a true picture????what is it that you are interested in vis-a-vis this thread? quote: you are putting words in my mouth but I think you have shown your true colours with your deliberate spelling of "Bangledash" as opposed to the country known as Bangladesh. Those who cannot or will not discuss the topic will invariably attack spelling errors...that is why I put them in for you. quote: The question of urban poverty will never be answered on a forum like this that so often becomes pathetically pureile, as you have so clearly demonstrated, all I was pointing out was that sometimes we, in the western world, need to have a look at the billions of people who are in genuine poverty before moaning about our supposed poverty. Feel free to answer the OP now Since we are discussing poverty in the u.s. how bout we discuss poverty in the u.s. and not in bangledash/

DesideriScuri -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/25/2013 7:10:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren Nope, not at all. Federal spending on schools is only 9% of all school spending, and in many places, especially the big cities the northeast, it represents a very small percentage of the school budgets. In most towns, and cities and counties, school taxes make up about 85% of local property tax bills. Other states do accept a lot more federal aid, a lot of the 'low tax' states down south get significant portions of their school budgets from the feds (roughly 25% in states like South Carolina), in NJ it is about 2%. Take a look at the best school districts in this country, the Potomac, Marylands, Scarsdale, NY, Mendham, NJ, Basking Ridge, NJ and so forth, you will find they spend a lot of money on their kids, in places like Scarsdale it is 20k_ per kid, whereas in the worst districts (old, familiar territory, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama) they spend a fraction of that, and they are at the bottom of the pile..btw, the same problems with schools in inner cities exist in rural, poor areas like apalchia, mississippi, and so forth...... No states as far as I know use income taxes to fund school programs, and federal spending is targeted, but it represents relatively little money (and the GOP has been trying for years to get rid of federal education spending). Section 8 is part of the problem, and so is public housing in general, plus there also is little incentive for those who economically move up to stay instead of moviing out to better neighborhoods. Toledo Metro area schools with 2011 rankings (of all 1000+ public schools in Ohio), Performance Index (PI) score % of Standards met and the $ spend per pupil: DISTRICT...............RANK...PI SCORE....STANDARDS MET......$/PUPIL Ottawa Hills Local.......9.......110.3578..........100.00%..........$14,265 Anthony Wayne Local.62.....106.3993...........100.00%...........$8,260 Perrysburg EVSD.......83.....105.5754...........100.00%...........$8,590 Sylvania City............107....104.116.............100.00%.........$11,574 Maumee City............132....103.2144...........100.00%..........$10,626 Springfield Local........239...100.8355...........100.00%............$9,320 Rossford EVSD..........309....99.5766.............96.20%...........$13,848 Northwood Local........386....98.2669.............96.20%.............$8,723 Washington Local.......448....96.8616.............88.50%...........$11,585 Oregon City..............484....96.1731..............76.90%...........$10,366 Toledo City...............708....83.0602..............19.20%...........$13,859 SOURCE Ottawa Hills has the highest area spend per pupil and the highest ranking of area schools (Note: I only compared data for the K-12 public schools and didn't include "specialty/charter" schools; rankings included Ohio specialty schools). Toledo Public has the second highest and the worst ranking. The highest rated school in Ohio is a charter school with a PI of 115.9375 and $/pupil of $24,038, and the highest rated public school (4th) is Indian Hill EVSD with a PI of 110.9731 and a $/pupil of $15,209. Toledo Public is a "city" school and has expenses that Ottawa Hills has (Ottawa Hills being in the "rich" area). Anthony Wayne School District has the lowest $/pupil in the area but is second highest ranked in the area. $/pupil is one metric that doesn't tell the whole story. It's akin to weight. If I told you a guy weighed 235# and was 6' 2", what does that tell you about his physique? I could tell you his BMI was 30.2, but that, again, doesn't give the whole story. According to height/weight charts, the "ideal" weight for this guy is 172-197, if he has a "large frame." A BMI of 30.2 lands this guy just into the "Obese" category. Looking strictly at one stat, like $/pupil, can give you an idea, but would consider Arnold Schwarzenegger 38+# over his ideal weight and "Obese" while he was at his competition weight. $/pupil might tell you something, but it also might not tell you anything without more information. Des....that is one fuck of a lot of numbers! I liken myself a mathemagician (perhaps a Sado-MATHochist, too). But, in this case here, I was simply attempting to be thorough.

Marini -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/25/2013 8:43:22 PM)
quote: Jobs are needed. Not talk. Economic revitalization of our cities has to be a national priority. That is why the proposal for an interracial dialogue is not a solution. Especially since it stems from the perceived need to salve the fears of whites who were left behind on the fringes of black neighborhoods. Talk is bullshit. Useless. We have a monumental economic catastrophe on our hands. Our cities never recovered from the post War social change. I don't know whatever happened to Jack Kemp's Enterprise Zones but probably the only solution is some kind of Government/Industry partnership to bring jobs back to the cities beginning with assembly work that can be done by high school drop outs and single mothers. And we may need police and fire protection in the beginning. Also government subsidized property insurance for businesses in blighted areas. Maybe combining the schools with new industries. Otherwise, I do not have a solution either. But, until the cities are revitalized economically interracial discourse is a waste of time because the unemployed do not trust the threatened and the threatened do not trust the unemployed. America cannot continue as a nation divided city from suburbs, blacks from whites. It is a national disgrace and disaster. Jobs, jobs, jobs.................... we used to have plenty of jobs. I mean you just have to LOVE Capitalism, RIGHT? I agree it is a national disagrace and a disaster. Thanks for all the great points and posts you are making Vincent. Peace

njlauren -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/25/2013 9:11:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren Nope, not at all. Federal spending on schools is only 9% of all school spending, and in many places, especially the big cities the northeast, it represents a very small percentage of the school budgets. In most towns, and cities and counties, school taxes make up about 85% of local property tax bills. Other states do accept a lot more federal aid, a lot of the 'low tax' states down south get significant portions of their school budgets from the feds (roughly 25% in states like South Carolina), in NJ it is about 2%. Take a look at the best school districts in this country, the Potomac, Marylands, Scarsdale, NY, Mendham, NJ, Basking Ridge, NJ and so forth, you will find they spend a lot of money on their kids, in places like Scarsdale it is 20k_ per kid, whereas in the worst districts (old, familiar territory, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama) they spend a fraction of that, and they are at the bottom of the pile..btw, the same problems with schools in inner cities exist in rural, poor areas like apalchia, mississippi, and so forth...... No states as far as I know use income taxes to fund school programs, and federal spending is targeted, but it represents relatively little money (and the GOP has been trying for years to get rid of federal education spending). Section 8 is part of the problem, and so is public housing in general, plus there also is little incentive for those who economically move up to stay instead of moviing out to better neighborhoods. Toledo Metro area schools with 2011 rankings (of all 1000+ public schools in Ohio), Performance Index (PI) score % of Standards met and the $ spend per pupil: DISTRICT...............RANK...PI SCORE....STANDARDS MET......$/PUPIL Ottawa Hills Local.......9.......110.3578..........100.00%..........$14,265 Anthony Wayne Local.62.....106.3993...........100.00%...........$8,260 Perrysburg EVSD.......83.....105.5754...........100.00%...........$8,590 Sylvania City............107....104.116.............100.00%.........$11,574 Maumee City............132....103.2144...........100.00%..........$10,626 Springfield Local........239...100.8355...........100.00%............$9,320 Rossford EVSD..........309....99.5766.............96.20%...........$13,848 Northwood Local........386....98.2669.............96.20%.............$8,723 Washington Local.......448....96.8616.............88.50%...........$11,585 Oregon City..............484....96.1731..............76.90%...........$10,366 Toledo City...............708....83.0602..............19.20%...........$13,859 SOURCE Ottawa Hills has the highest area spend per pupil and the highest ranking of area schools (Note: I only compared data for the K-12 public schools and didn't include "specialty/charter" schools; rankings included Ohio specialty schools). Toledo Public has the second highest and the worst ranking. The highest rated school in Ohio is a charter school with a PI of 115.9375 and $/pupil of $24,038, and the highest rated public school (4th) is Indian Hill EVSD with a PI of 110.9731 and a $/pupil of $15,209. Toledo Public is a "city" school and has expenses that Ottawa Hills has (Ottawa Hills being in the "rich" area). Anthony Wayne School District has the lowest $/pupil in the area but is second highest ranked in the area. $/pupil is one metric that doesn't tell the whole story. It's akin to weight. If I told you a guy weighed 235# and was 6' 2", what does that tell you about his physique? I could tell you his BMI was 30.2, but that, again, doesn't give the whole story. According to height/weight charts, the "ideal" weight for this guy is 172-197, if he has a "large frame." A BMI of 30.2 lands this guy just into the "Obese" category. Looking strictly at one stat, like $/pupil, can give you an idea, but would consider Arnold Schwarzenegger 38+# over his ideal weight and "Obese" while he was at his competition weight. $/pupil might tell you something, but it also might not tell you anything without more information. Des....that is one fuck of a lot of numbers! I liken myself a mathemagician (perhaps a Sado-MATHochist, too). But, in this case here, I was simply attempting to be thorough. It gets to be very complex, and one of the things conservatives are right about, and that is throwing money at an issue doesn't necessarily fix it. There is another thing that comes into play here, how much of it gets into the classroom, and that is a biggie. In NJ, Newark has a shit school system, as do some other cities, and yet, if you look at overall spending, the per pupil spending can be higher then the best districts..but when you analyze what gets down to the classroom, different story. For example, schools in Newark have security needs suburban schools don't and it is costly. The big one is special ed, in urban districts, large percentages of the kids are special ed and that is $$$$$.......you get the idea. The other problem is what is being used to measure. In your example, those are state minimum skills tests, basic reading and math......so the district that spends 15 has 100% of the kids in compliance, but a district with 14k has low numbers, and one that spends 8k seems to get the same result... But that raises the question, what are they measuring? And who is taking the test? The 8k a year district could be a well off, solid middle class enclave, and the kids have educated parents, and could probably pass those tests in their sleep, the 14k district that does bad might be a poor district in terms of people, where they have a lot of immigrants,single parent households, and it is a struggle with the kids...... On top of everything else, those tests are minimums. They started giving those when I was in school, and we used to have competitions to see who could finish them the fastest (I held the record for 3 years, till some smart ass kid wiped it out), we all got 100% and thought it was a joke...we took them in high school, and I could have gotten 100% when I was in 7th grade......and in the district in your graph with 8k spending, how many of those kids go on to college? How many have taken college prep curricula, with AP's and so forth, and gotten into competitive schools? The kids in the 14k district can only get 100% on those tests, but that same school district might be sending 90% of its graduates to college, and large numbers to highly competitive schools, where the kids in the 8k district have much, much lower achievement (I obviously don't know).. It is the problem with single dimensional stats, they don't give the whole picture. It gets very very complicated. I don't know if you are familiar with Malcolm Gladwell's book "Outliers", if not pick it up, it is a great read....in any event, they have studied schools and schooling, comparing inner city and well off kids, and one of the big differences is the summer; what they found is that kids in the inner city, by end of year, had roughly the same level of achievement with their more well off suburban cousins, but what they found was the well off kids had their education re-inforced over the summer (not taking classes, but rather as part of their lives), they were reading and so forth, while their inner city cousins lost ground, and then spent a good part of the next year just catching up to where they had been the prior June...... I always loved my dad, he was great at deploying pompous asses. My siblings and I did generally well in school, were in NHS, near the top in grades, etc...anway, at one of these events, I think it was NHS induction, the principal was going on and on with any parent who would listen to him, about how well kids in the school did, went to ivy league and similar schools, etc, etc..and my dad asked him a question, he asked him how much could he (meaning the school) take credit for that? My dad pointed out that the kids in the school tended to come from families where both parents were well educated, most kids had both parents who went to college or beyond, lot of engineers, doctors and so forth among the parents..and in effect he said you started with great material, so what did you really do to get them to achieve..or did he......:)

Owner59 -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/25/2013 9:19:45 PM)
Notice how the Oppy gives so few choices....and the ones given blame the victims....... [image]http://izquotes.com/quotes-pictures/quote-a-nation-that-continues-year-after-year-to-spend-more-money-on-military-defense-than-on-programs-of-martin-luther-king-jr-102447.jpg[/image]

Marini -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/25/2013 9:21:26 PM)
njlauren, I enjoy skimming your shorter posts. lauren, you make great points, but could you try being a bit more concise? You are an interesting read, even if I often need to skim your posts. {having adhd is a bitch} Peace

njlauren -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/25/2013 9:22:10 PM)
Another point, that won't earn me any brownie points, but the other problem is how things like work and success can be viewed in areas we are talking about, the inner city area with the cycles of poverty, single moms, etc.....and the problem is that a sub culture develops that is really, really hard to break, and it is the idea that somehow doing well in school, trying to push ahead, to get that job or whatever, is selling out. A cousin of mine and I mentored some kids who were lucky, they had a committed parent/family, someone spotted them, and they were in this mentorship program, and they spoke how hard it could be, because they faced some real shit for being bright and trying, they faced kids calling them maggots, sellouts, oreo cookies, and some spanish terms that I don't know if I ever got the translation for (maricone, or fag, was one of the nicer ones).....that somehow to be authentic you have to talk like some parody in a movie, act like a thug.......where the local drug dealer, who probably was driving a BMW, had a hot girlfriend with all the bling, you name it, was valued more highly than the guy who went to work each day to support his family,many of them working multiple jobs (I used to kid this one Jamaican family who lived on the same block I did, I told them they made me look like slackers, I worked long hours, they worked long hours at multiple jobs, and their kids were like holy shit). Before this becomes me seeming to be saying 'they are all like that' (god that 'they' drives me to distraction, as bad as 'those people'), it isn't, it is a significant sub culture, but it isn't everyone, there are also a lot of people who have dreams and hopes for their kids the way most people do, lot of decent people caught in a shit setting......but they are hurt by the sub culture, too.....(on the other hand, one of the worst attitudes towards learning i saw was at a school my son went to, a private school with hefty tuition in grade school (almost 20k), these really well off, privileged kids who acted more then a stereotype of an inner city kid, unreal..)

Marini -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/25/2013 9:26:29 PM)
--->gives njlauren brownie points AND home baked cookies!! [;)]

absolutchocolat -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/26/2013 1:51:34 AM)
Mmm, now there's a thought. [;)]

DesideriScuri -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/26/2013 5:10:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren It gets to be very complex, and one of the things conservatives are right about, and that is throwing money at an issue doesn't necessarily fix it. There is another thing that comes into play here, how much of it gets into the classroom, and that is a biggie. In NJ, Newark has a shit school system, as do some other cities, and yet, if you look at overall spending, the per pupil spending can be higher then the best districts..but when you analyze what gets down to the classroom, different story. For example, schools in Newark have security needs suburban schools don't and it is costly. The big one is special ed, in urban districts, large percentages of the kids are special ed and that is $$$$$.......you get the idea. My Dad retired as an Asst. Superintendent. I have asked him a lot of questions. I also used to talk a lot with a fellow HS alum who is a Superintendent of a City school system. I have asked him a lot of questions, too (and his politics are opposite mine). All those things do cost more for urban districts compared to suburban districts. And, the socioeconomic status of the students will also play into how much $$ is required to make sure the poorer kids are fed breakfast and lunch. quote: The other problem is what is being used to measure. In your example, those are state minimum skills tests, basic reading and math......so the district that spends 15 has 100% of the kids in compliance, but a district with 14k has low numbers, and one that spends 8k seems to get the same result... Actually, the State has criteria set for the "Performance Index" scoring. It's not just state minimum skills testing, either. And, the school types differ in the number of standards that apply. That was one of the reasons I limited my discussion of the schools to the ones I did. All the schools I listed were the only ones in the area where all 26 standards applied. I don't have a listing of the standards, but I'm sure they are listed on the site, and I'm sure testing does come into play. quote: But that raises the question, what are they measuring? And who is taking the test? The 8k a year district could be a well off, solid middle class enclave, and the kids have educated parents, and could probably pass those tests in their sleep, the 14k district that does bad might be a poor district in terms of people, where they have a lot of immigrants,single parent households, and it is a struggle with the kids...... On top of everything else, those tests are minimums. They started giving those when I was in school, and we used to have competitions to see who could finish them the fastest (I held the record for 3 years, till some smart ass kid wiped it out), we all got 100% and thought it was a joke...we took them in high school, and I could have gotten 100% when I was in 7th grade......and in the district in your graph with 8k spending, how many of those kids go on to college? How many have taken college prep curricula, with AP's and so forth, and gotten into competitive schools? The kids in the 14k district can only get 100% on those tests, but that same school district might be sending 90% of its graduates to college, and large numbers to highly competitive schools, where the kids in the 8k district have much, much lower achievement (I obviously don't know).. It is the problem with single dimensional stats, they don't give the whole picture. That was one reason I posted what I did (and addressed it with my height/weight/BMI example). Within the Toledo Public District, there are some schools that are gems and perform well, when it comes time to give school report cards (each District gets a PI score, and each school within the District also gets rated). And, there are schools that don't perform well. It is quite obvious that simply giving bonuses and raises without consideration of results doesn't work, but designing a system that rewards results can (and has) lead to unintended consequences (ie. "teaching to the test"). My boys go to one of those schools. My then-wife and I moved out of Toledo and the #1 reason was to get into a better school district for my boys. That was the primary concern (the house wasn't large enough for a family of 3 growing boys, so we did need to move to a new house, but Toledo has plenty of larger houses/properties). And, that can negatively impact the District being left, too. At one point, there was a lot of blame spread on families, who left Toledo for the 'burbs, for the woes of Toledo Public. While it is true, blaming those families isn't going to help at all. Blaming parents who are doing things for the benefit of their kids should always take precedence over the good of the school district. quote: It gets very very complicated. I don't know if you are familiar with Malcolm Gladwell's book "Outliers", if not pick it up, it is a great read....in any event, they have studied schools and schooling, comparing inner city and well off kids, and one of the big differences is the summer; what they found is that kids in the inner city, by end of year, had roughly the same level of achievement with their more well off suburban cousins, but what they found was the well off kids had their education re-inforced over the summer (not taking classes, but rather as part of their lives), they were reading and so forth, while their inner city cousins lost ground, and then spent a good part of the next year just catching up to where they had been the prior June...... I always loved my dad, he was great at deploying pompous asses. My siblings and I did generally well in school, were in NHS, near the top in grades, etc...anway, at one of these events, I think it was NHS induction, the principal was going on and on with any parent who would listen to him, about how well kids in the school did, went to ivy league and similar schools, etc, etc..and my dad asked him a question, he asked him how much could he (meaning the school) take credit for that? My dad pointed out that the kids in the school tended to come from families where both parents were well educated, most kids had both parents who went to college or beyond, lot of engineers, doctors and so forth among the parents..and in effect he said you started with great material, so what did you really do to get them to achieve..or did he......:) I have not heard of Malcolm Gladwell, but I have also not widely read researchers of school topics, either. Your Dad was brilliant. I would have loved to have seen the Principal's face. That being said, I maintain the largest part of academic success occurs outside of school. An environment where academics are both stressed and supported is very important towards overall academic success. IMO, schools are in a fucked up position. They are being required to take on the role of the parents (for some students), in addition to their roles as teachers. Why do schools feed kids breakfast? Is that really something a school should be doing? Shouldn't that be a parent's responsibility? If parents were responsible for being the parents and let the schools be the place for academics, things would be so much better. Sadly, I have yet to figure out a way to force parents to be parents.

Zonie63 -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/26/2013 9:16:12 AM)
FR One thing that's always baffled me about the issue of urban poverty is that it usually tends to focus on the larger, "major league" cities, such as Detroit, Philadelphia, Chicago, etc., while failing to take into consideration that most poverty is in rural areas and the smaller "minor league" cities. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lowest-income_counties_in_the_United_States [image]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/ba/Lowpcimap.png[/image] Compared to smaller cities and rural areas, the large cities have rather high rents and living expenses. The people who live in those cities have to have higher wages in order to live. Workers in NYC will typically earn higher wages than their counterparts in places like Texas or South Dakota. As far as bringing jobs and economic opportunities to both cities and rural areas, that would involve challenging certain "Sacred Cows" held by the economic intelligentsia in this country. That's where the problems come into play, since these cities didn't fall apart overnight. It took decades of neglect, compounded by misguided economic, domestic, and foreign policies, and all levels of government should take the blame, not just local government (although there are some local governments which are pretty sleazy, like that of Bell, California). I don't know how widespread such wanton corruption and theft is going on in the local governments, but there have been a few cases here - where millions of dollars (even hundreds of millions) turns up missing and nobody knows where it went. I've heard of other mayors and local officials in other cities get caught with their hands in the cookie jar, and it stinks all the way around. Perhaps these cities themselves are also becoming "Sacred Cows." I've never actually lived in some of these larger cities back east, so it's hard for me to identify with those who have a certain sentimental attachment to "back home," whether it's Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia, New York, Boston, etc. People really love their cities, so there seems to an intangible sentimental factor that may exist beyond just economics or politics. Some of our cities are dying, yet there are still those who want to maintain the local charm, culture, history, traditions and keep their cities and neighborhoods as they've always remembered them. I get that impression whenever I read stories of urban decline, since they're usually accompanied by stories of the "good old days" when their cities were a vibrant center of industry, business, culture, arts, sports. (Cities and their sports teams might be a separate topic altogether.) As for jobs, they have to compete with other cities all over the country. Offer incentives for companies to move to their city. Some cities employ economic councils, advisors, and salesmen to go out and sell their city as an attractive place for a company to move to and bring high paying jobs. Cities have to make investments in education and infrastructure (which is difficult in cities where the local bureaucrats and politicians funnel a lot of that money into their own pockets). Maybe they ought to impose stronger penalties on corrupt politicians and bureaucrats caught looting the public treasury. Some of this stuff really stinks. Even here locally, there's this project where $230 million ended up missing. The streets are falling apart, the city is strapped for cash, and many of the schools are underperforming (while there are administrators at the district office pulling in six-figure salaries).

vincentML -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/26/2013 10:51:37 AM)
quote: One thing that's always baffled me about the issue of urban poverty is that it usually tends to focus on the larger, "major league" cities, such as Detroit, Philadelphia, Chicago, etc., while failing to take into consideration that most poverty is in rural areas and the smaller "minor league" cities. Not to deflect interest from rural poverty but there is a larger concentration of economic underclass in the great cities where transportation facilities and civic services are more readily available. The poor who did not own cars were abandoned by the middle classes who had cars and could live in the suburbs. The auto and the new highways allowed businesses of all sorts to migrate away also. And let's not minimize the effects brought on by the cycle of poverty and crime that occurred in the cities and city schools that gave the middle class incentive to move away. In a similar fashion the rural poor were abandoned when family farms were consolidated into large industrial farms and meat processing plants. The young people often migrated away to find new jobs in the suburbs. Young whites from the farms could more easily assimilate into the new suburban economies of the 1950s, 60s, etc. Not so easy for urban blacks is my guess. Bottom line, there is no blame to be assigned. Our poverty patterns are the result of historic economic and social trends. If there is a solution it lies in reversing those trends by inviting industries back into the cities and into the rural areas. But this reverse economic migration will not occur unless there is fiscal benefit for the corporations. The oil boom in North Dakota offers evidence that jobs will come to where there is incentive. The availability of cheap labor might be an incentive if industries and the schools could form mutually beneficial partnerships. Somehow we have to outchina China without exploiting our own underclass. An awful lot of bright and talented young folks are being left behind, the resources of their minds and abilities untapped. I do not have the answer on how to bring new jobs to the cities and rural districts. However, there are some indications of a trend reversal. If so, it is a long term solution so don't hold your breath. I believe most people in poor urban areas are eager to take personal responsibility for their own economic welfare. They are no different in that respect from any other people.

absolutchocolat -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/26/2013 11:09:48 AM)
FR I don't think the corporations are going to have a sudden change of heart and begin manufacturing in the States again. It is too damn lucrative to do it overseas. Materials are cheaper, labor is cheaper and taxes are much lower. Also, all of the "progress" China is making comes on the backs of the working poor. And let's not forget all of the folks in the countryside starving and working shit jobs for pennies. I guess it doesn't matter as long as we have sneakers and iPhones, though.

vincentML -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/26/2013 12:22:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: absolutchocolat FR I don't think the corporations are going to have a sudden change of heart and begin manufacturing in the States again. It is too damn lucrative to do it overseas. Materials are cheaper, labor is cheaper and taxes are much lower. Also, all of the "progress" China is making comes on the backs of the working poor. And let's not forget all of the folks in the countryside starving and working shit jobs for pennies. I guess it doesn't matter as long as we have sneakers and iPhones, though. I hope you do not think I was holding China up as an exemplar. You are correct saying corporations that manufacture overseas will not of a sudden have a change of heart. Perhaps there is some bundle of incentives to be packaged to lure manufacturers to Detroit and South Chicago, etc. Some partnership of government, unions and corporations might be forged. Otherwise, I fear our cities will decay further.

papassion -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/26/2013 2:25:36 PM)
Welfare causes enduring poverty. A Harrisburg paper did an investigation of the Pa welfare department. A single mother with 2 kids, if she applied for all she is entitled to under the current rules, would have to make $80,000 in the private sector to equal what she gets from welfare. There is housing, food benefits, healthcare benefits, some kind of childcare if she gets a job and still qualifies for benefits, preschool benefits for young children, etc. etc. This story was reported on the Harrisburg TV stations and on the national services. It is also intereresting, I think 3 high level Pa. Welfare Department officials recently resigned. You might have seen the story about Pa welfare access cards have been used in all 50 states, the Virgin islands, strip clubs, casinos, and luxury hotels. I saw a similar story about The California Welfare Dept. The Harrisburg paper requested a list of where the access cards were used, (not peoples names) but the Pa Dept of Welfare refused the request.

cordeliasub -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/26/2013 3:43:08 PM)
I am not sure the problem CAN be boiled down to just two or three bullet points. I think that is part of the problem. Oh, and AL funds education through sales tax, not property tax...which is part of the reason we are always 48th or 49th....ask an AL educator about proration.

DesideriScuri -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/26/2013 4:15:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cordeliasub I am not sure the problem CAN be boiled down to just two or three bullet points. I think that is part of the problem. Oh, and AL funds education through sales tax, not property tax...which is part of the reason we are always 48th or 49th....ask an AL educator about proration. Ohio still uses property taxes as a funding source for schools. There is also funding from State and Federal Government, which would be income taxes. Years ago, the Ohio Supreme Robes ruled the way Ohio funds public schools is unConstitutional. So, we've continued to do what we've continued to do because no one can come up with a better way, and forcing the situation (getting rid of all school-related property taxes to force schools and Government to come up with a Constitutional way) would be absolutely wrong to do to the Districts, employees and students.

dcnovice -> RE: What causes urban poverty (3/26/2013 4:43:36 PM)
quote: Welfare causes enduring poverty. Welfare is, what, maybe 200 years old? Poverty is as old as time.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Spam Policy

0.0625