SPLIT TOPIC: American society: the poor the unemployed

So what's the question? I'm stil lost

I was trying to see whether any us would provide government subsidized health insurance to the carpenter.

Needless to say, if you asked the carpenter if he wanted government health insurance ....he'd likely say "sure, as long as it doesn't cost me more than 6k over a three period"

currently he spends the following:

yr 1: 1k

yr 2: 1 k

yr 3: 1k + 3k for ER visit

total 6k.

He'd be willing to spend 2k a yr for health insurance as a result.

Should we (aka the government) provide it to him for this cost? That is all he is willing to pay.

Should we give it to him free in the years that his income is lousy?

BG stated that maximum corporate profit is the most important factor in society. It's not. But it is definitely critical to maintaining a corporate tax base within New York to subsidize what would be exorbitant taxes. Leading to more flight of those able to flee.

"If our corporate structure means that minimum wage HAS to be $15,000 a year in order for us to be functional, then we need to do better, as a society."

Yes but we also have to resume functioning as a true society. Last time I checked, generally TWO people produced a child. At minimum wage, that equals $30K. There was also familial support and charitable organizations which would also provide support should one parent become incapacitated. I certainly remember rent parties and funeral envelopes as a child. Also round robin baby-sitting by moms.

Society seemed to function a bit better BEFORE everyone started to focus on "finding one's self"

In recent years, several of my close friends have relocated to North Carolina/South Carolina for various reasons. One went to Florida. The COL down south is so different from here - two of the couples who left are no longer two income families(by need here); the moms have opted to stay at home and be full time moms. Neither dad makes close to $90K. Their skills? Sales. Go figure.

BTW, there was a huge demand for carpenters in the area since much of the housing needed renovation. Cost of 3 bedroom home near Charlotte? $180K. Taxes? Pittance (less than $1K).

Perhaps we should focus on "what (if anything) should we do with the situation we have?"

i.e. Like it or not, we have large numbers of families headed by one parent who are unable to afford market rate housing and food.

We presently respond with food stamps and subsidized housing.

....I do believe HRA will still give people a bus ticket to another state if they state they could live with a family member (say, in North Carolina), yet simply lack the funds to go there.

Needless to say, NY can not simply give out bus tickets to other states without being able to demonstrate that they would have housing upon their arrival. ...such regulations prevent "war" between the states.

Your framework strikes me as odd, as if I'm talking about a car or owning a home or some other material good.

It's merely a benchmark I've chosen.

If working full time for minimum wage isn't enough to raise a kid and afford health care costs, afford rent or owning, a car (or public transit), then we have a problem.

You and your partner may be choosing to wait, but something tells me that if you did have a kid, you could tighten your belts and still not be one health issue away from literally living on the streets.

People making $15,000 a year do not have this luxury.

Simply put: something like having kids cannot be a luxury of the middle class or people who manage to find high enough hourly wages.

As he often does, WhyNot has put his finger directly on the problem: while CTK is absolutely correct that people who cannot afford children should not have children, that doesn't seem to stop them from having children... sometimes many children.

Until our society is sufficiently Orwellian to perform vasectomies and tube-tying operations on everyone, in early adolescence, to be reversed only if and when acceptable proof of sufficient economic resources is presented, we have to make provision to take care of the blameless children born to those who do not think (or at least do not consider economic ramifications) before they recreate.

What I was trying to point out was that people need to be personally responsible for their actions.

Nobody is arguing otherwise. What I have been talking about this whole time is the very large amount of people who work full time or work two jobs and still aren't making enough to live, whether in NYC or anywhere else.

Health care costs are high everywhere.

Housing costs are high everywhere.

Getting your car fixed so you can drive to your 2nd job is expensive everywhere.

Keeping a kitchen stocked and usable is out of the budget of many, many people who work full time.

I agree that lazy people should be left on their own. The problem, of course, is that many many MANY poor people are not lazy and probably work harder than you or I do.

I hear what you are saying CTK but having seen it all my life many women "think" that this man will do the right thing. I believe that ultimately we need more "active" role models for young teens. What I mean by active is someone who is accessible not some athlete or movie star. I think breaking a cycle of young parenthood needs to be addressed. Many of these girls who fall for these men who lead them on have low self esteem and some who come from single parents homes are also looking for a "daddy" figure.

The whole system is just a clusterfuck. My best friend lived in a homeless shelter for 2 years with her daughter. She was 35, lived with her boyfriend and they had plans to marry. She got pregnant and all of a sudden he went back to Jamaica and left her high and dry. She lost her job and has no family here. Because she was working until her 8th month part time she was let go from her job. She could not live with me because then she would not be put on the list for housing (and she is extremely allergic to cats and dogs). During her time at the shelter her (as well as other single mothers) wanted to take courses to gain a marketable skill. She was told that she must be at the shelter between certain hours and those hours made it impossible for her to take any classes. If she got a job that brought in even $100 a week she would be out of the shelter. It is like a sick catch 22.

Finally she applied for hundreds of programs and was accepted in to one where she has to either go to school full time (certificate program only) or work full time. During this time she is required to put a certain percentage of her income (either from her full time job or within 60 days of earning her certificate) into a savings account for 2 years. During these 2 years she gets subsidized housing money, medicaid as well as $200 per month for food stamps and a check for $250 per month for her child and her to live on (the check is only if she is in school). After 2 years her rent will be pro-rated to her income and she will have a nice little saving account that should help her through any rough times.

Now while I think this program might be on to something it took 2 years of her being in a shelter to be offered this program.

So to that end there are definitely points in the system that need fixing. But I think the answer is in examining why things are so expensive (college IMO is incredibly overpriced, esp. for a lot of degrees out there) and seeing where needless costs can be cut, rather than raising taxes/increasing subsidies. It wasn't always like this, and it shouldn't be like this.

I think you said it perfectly here. I would not leave NYC because there are some of the best CUNY and SUNY schools here and that is pretty much all I would be able to afford. And believe me my son WILL be attending college. It was very hard for my parents to send me (my mom was a widow and again I could not get financial aid and loans were hard to come by since again I was 18 and my mom was a widow). And this is the only regret I have in my life.

I always felt that there should be a tax of $1.75 on everyone's paycheck who works in the 5 boroughs. That money should go directly to public schools and the lottery money should go to defray costs of colleges and trade schools for those parents stuck in situations like myself and for adults to help further their education or just to obtain one. You may say another tax but hell some people spend that just to take money out of the ATM. We never bitch about that little SSA guy for $1.20 on our paystubs.

CTK raises one of my pet peeves - help going to the wrong people. I am sorry but I become enraged when I see a family with clearly an Anchor baby taking advantage of scant resources which could be more fairly allocated to those people who have contributed to the system/are contributing to the system and yet find themselves in circumstances such as Stacey's friend. Sorry, the 14th Amendment was not designed to automatically grant citizenship. It was designed to protect the rights of citizenship for the recently freed slaves. The concept that you can come to this country illegally, fail to pay taxes and then seek support is galling. Sorry, that Anchor baby is a fruit of the poisoned tree so to speak. Should that baby starve? No. But should another baby have less if funds are so low?

I see the poor's desire to escape their present lives in the proliferation of for-profit (or high tuition "non-profit") tech schools.

[their advertisements are frequently on the subway and buses]

...some of these schools prey on desperation, and trap their students in mountains of debt in exchange for certificates of questionable value..

I wish SUNY and CUNY, and more foundations like the ones that fund Grace would step up to the task.

The current array of publicly sponsored tech institutes and community colleges have fallen short.

...there was recently an effort to deny federal financial aid to the "most questionable" for profit tech schools, but I believe the effort was defeated.