An Idealist's Solution to the Major Problem in the US

[HUGGY]

I won’t bother going through the usual ‘who did what, when and who do we blame’ scenario when It comes to decade upon decade of failing the poor, minorities, and black students, high levels of crime and violence, drugs etc. I would, however, like to consider a long term approach to actually fixing the problem. And, it’s not really even about race…. It’s about poverty and expectations. Poverty and low expectations are not a race issue, they are a societal one.

In my view, the issue starts with parents. For reasons that I will not go into (because it’ll just distract from the actual point), we have generation after generation of uneducated Americans whose life appears to be a pattern, outlined below:

Teenage girl, raised by a teenaged single Mom, has sex, gets pregnant, has child. That child knows no other life, sees no other examples in her community and repeats the pattern. So we have intergenerational children raising children, and that not just within families but across whole neighborhoods and communities. Because we have children raising children, those children are raised by Moms (let’s temporarily forget about ‘baby daddy’s’ – I’ll come back to them later) who are ill-prepared to raise a child properly. By ‘properly’, I mean to encourage their child to work hard at school, set boundaries and instil discipline, respect for themselves and other people, and love.

Boys are raised with no male role model, so their view of life is equally stilted. They see females as disposable, children as disposable, and life as something that happens rather than a series of opportunities to seize or ignore. They have kids by different females, most take no responsibility – financially or in any other way.

That’s the pattern. The question for society is this…. Is that acceptable in the United States? I would say no.

We have an intergenerational issue of people with no expectations, breeding another generation with no expectations. That is what we need to address.

So, how do we address it? That’s a really, really hard one… and the answers are not going to be pretty. They will require very hard choices…. And they will require money. Here is what I think we should do:

We need to enforce education on young people. It’s not an optional extra. That means we need to get into the poor communities and show them another way. Sounds easy. It’s not. Because they won’t necessarily want to learn it. But, if we get to the children – and their teenage parents – and insist (not a choice…. I know, I know, the liberals are gonna scream about their rights – and the right will scream about the Constitution…. but we as a society simply cannot afford an ever growing group of uneducated, disengaged citizens – financially, we cannot afford them). So…. How about we tell those young people who have children ‘That’s it – no more welfare for any more kids’. We’ll provide them with alternatives, give them access to birth control and reward them for following a program to help them raise the next generation to have higher expectations. We provide any help they need – housing, drugs, counselling, education We need them to LEARN a better way.

Obviously, the cost of such a program would be significant. Actually, it would be frightening. So, how do we pay for it? Well, that’s where we need to be even more creative. We should get the private sector to fund it. Now the right wing will be screaming at me and the liberals will be thrilled! Work with me…. It’ll get clearer!!

IF we could solve these problems, we could save vast amounts of money. So, we get the private sector to fund it and we pay them back – and we pay them bonuses – from the savings made on a vastly reduced welfare bill. And we could part fund it through bonds – and let ordinary Americans profit from helping their fellow Americans.

Solve that one problem and we can:

1. Cut crime and save money – the more educated someone is, the less likely they are to commit crime. Those with decent jobs are less likely to commit crime. We’d save vast amounts within the justice system, court costs, prison, community sentences, etc.

2. An educated workforce attracts jobs. Instead of haemorrhaging jobs like we are, we would attract inward investment (foreign jobs) into our country.

3. Save vast amounts on welfare, so we could afford to better help those truly deserving it. Those who are not capable of taking care of themselves, the elderly, children, those with mental problems, or physical disabilities.

4. Cut taxes – who doesn’t want more money in their pocket. That money creates jobs, because the more we have, the more we spend – and we wouldn’t have to run up credit to do it.

The whole thing needs to be detailed out but, in general, as a concept, USMB, what do you think?

I know it’s gonna bump up against the Constitution in some areas, and I know it would not be as straightforward as I outline but as a concept…. Would it work or am I just an idealist?

Blah...Blah...Blah...

The problem with education for the last 20 years is more about the hopelessness of the end game. You say you want better education? Then why do you support the policies that make it pointless to get one? The reason to get a better education is to go to a college or a good trade school. The outsourcing of many of our better paying jobs has decimated the middle class. Therefore fewer families can afford to send their kids to a higher education. The kids aren't stupid..they are dissalusioned. They see well educated people from the previous generation struggling to get by. This is the price we pay for not taking care of the interests of the USA over the narrow antiAmerican interests of multinational corporations.

 

[geauxtohell]

I won’t bother going through the usual ‘who did what, when and who do we blame’ scenario when It comes to decade upon decade of failing the poor, minorities, and black students, high levels of crime and violence, drugs etc. I would, however, like to consider a long term approach to actually fixing the problem. And, it’s not really even about race…. It’s about poverty and expectations. Poverty and low expectations are not a race issue, they are a societal one.

In my view, the issue starts with parents. For reasons that I will not go into (because it’ll just distract from the actual point), we have generation after generation of uneducated Americans whose life appears to be a pattern, outlined below:

Teenage girl, raised by a teenaged single Mom, has sex, gets pregnant, has child. That child knows no other life, sees no other examples in her community and repeats the pattern. So we have intergenerational children raising children, and that not just within families but across whole neighborhoods and communities. Because we have children raising children, those children are raised by Moms (let’s temporarily forget about ‘baby daddy’s’ – I’ll come back to them later) who are ill-prepared to raise a child properly. By ‘properly’, I mean to encourage their child to work hard at school, set boundaries and instil discipline, respect for themselves and other people, and love.

Boys are raised with no male role model, so their view of life is equally stilted. They see females as disposable, children as disposable, and life as something that happens rather than a series of opportunities to seize or ignore. They have kids by different females, most take no responsibility – financially or in any other way.

That’s the pattern. The question for society is this…. Is that acceptable in the United States? I would say no.

We have an intergenerational issue of people with no expectations, breeding another generation with no expectations. That is what we need to address.

So, how do we address it? That’s a really, really hard one… and the answers are not going to be pretty. They will require very hard choices…. And they will require money. Here is what I think we should do:

We need to enforce education on young people. It’s not an optional extra. That means we need to get into the poor communities and show them another way. Sounds easy. It’s not. Because they won’t necessarily want to learn it. But, if we get to the children – and their teenage parents – and insist (not a choice…. I know, I know, the liberals are gonna scream about their rights – and the right will scream about the Constitution…. but we as a society simply cannot afford an ever growing group of uneducated, disengaged citizens – financially, we cannot afford them). So…. How about we tell those young people who have children ‘That’s it – no more welfare for any more kids’. We’ll provide them with alternatives, give them access to birth control and reward them for following a program to help them raise the next generation to have higher expectations. We provide any help they need – housing, drugs, counselling, education We need them to LEARN a better way.

Obviously, the cost of such a program would be significant. Actually, it would be frightening. So, how do we pay for it? Well, that’s where we need to be even more creative. We should get the private sector to fund it. Now the right wing will be screaming at me and the liberals will be thrilled! Work with me…. It’ll get clearer!!

IF we could solve these problems, we could save vast amounts of money. So, we get the private sector to fund it and we pay them back – and we pay them bonuses – from the savings made on a vastly reduced welfare bill. And we could part fund it through bonds – and let ordinary Americans profit from helping their fellow Americans.

Solve that one problem and we can:

1. Cut crime and save money – the more educated someone is, the less likely they are to commit crime. Those with decent jobs are less likely to commit crime. We’d save vast amounts within the justice system, court costs, prison, community sentences, etc.

2. An educated workforce attracts jobs. Instead of haemorrhaging jobs like we are, we would attract inward investment (foreign jobs) into our country.

3. Save vast amounts on welfare, so we could afford to better help those truly deserving it. Those who are not capable of taking care of themselves, the elderly, children, those with mental problems, or physical disabilities.

4. Cut taxes – who doesn’t want more money in their pocket. That money creates jobs, because the more we have, the more we spend – and we wouldn’t have to run up credit to do it.

The whole thing needs to be detailed out but, in general, as a concept, USMB, what do you think?

I know it’s gonna bump up against the Constitution in some areas, and I know it would not be as straightforward as I outline but as a concept…. Would it work or am I just an idealist?

Blah...Blah...Blah...

The problem with education for the last 20 years is more about the hopelessness of the end game. You say you want better education? Then why do you support the policies that make it pointless to get one? The reason to get a better education is to a college or a good trade school. The outsourcing of many of our better paying jobs has decimated the middle class. Therefore fewer families can afford to send their kids to a higher education. The kids aren't stupid..they are dissalusioned. They see well educated people from the previous generation struggling to get by. This is the price we pay for not taking care of the interests of the USA over the narrow antiAmerican interests of multinational corporations.

I agree with this as well.

 

[boedicca]

Uh. Total spending on education per pupil in constant dollars has TRIPLED since the 1960s, with a large portion of that increase going to teachers salaries and benefits.

We've already tried the spending - it doesn't work.

And the DOD budget as a share of federal spending (not the budget, but actual outlays) has shrunk dramatically during that time.

 

[HUGGY]

Uh. Total spending on education per pupil in constant dollars has TRIPLED since the 1960s, with a large portion of that increase going to teachers salaries and benefits.

We've already tried the spending - it doesn't work.

And the DOD budget as a share of federal spending (not the budget, but actual outlays) has shrunk dramatically during that time.

Spend all you want. If there is no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow you are throwing your money down the toilet.

 

[California Girl]

I won’t bother going through the usual ‘who did what, when and who do we blame’ scenario when It comes to decade upon decade of failing the poor, minorities, and black students, high levels of crime and violence, drugs etc. I would, however, like to consider a long term approach to actually fixing the problem. And, it’s not really even about race…. It’s about poverty and expectations. Poverty and low expectations are not a race issue, they are a societal one.

In my view, the issue starts with parents. For reasons that I will not go into (because it’ll just distract from the actual point), we have generation after generation of uneducated Americans whose life appears to be a pattern, outlined below:

Teenage girl, raised by a teenaged single Mom, has sex, gets pregnant, has child. That child knows no other life, sees no other examples in her community and repeats the pattern. So we have intergenerational children raising children, and that not just within families but across whole neighborhoods and communities. Because we have children raising children, those children are raised by Moms (let’s temporarily forget about ‘baby daddy’s’ – I’ll come back to them later) who are ill-prepared to raise a child properly. By ‘properly’, I mean to encourage their child to work hard at school, set boundaries and instil discipline, respect for themselves and other people, and love.

Boys are raised with no male role model, so their view of life is equally stilted. They see females as disposable, children as disposable, and life as something that happens rather than a series of opportunities to seize or ignore. They have kids by different females, most take no responsibility – financially or in any other way.

That’s the pattern. The question for society is this…. Is that acceptable in the United States? I would say no.

We have an intergenerational issue of people with no expectations, breeding another generation with no expectations. That is what we need to address.

So, how do we address it? That’s a really, really hard one… and the answers are not going to be pretty. They will require very hard choices…. And they will require money. Here is what I think we should do:

We need to enforce education on young people. It’s not an optional extra. That means we need to get into the poor communities and show them another way. Sounds easy. It’s not. Because they won’t necessarily want to learn it. But, if we get to the children – and their teenage parents – and insist (not a choice…. I know, I know, the liberals are gonna scream about their rights – and the right will scream about the Constitution…. but we as a society simply cannot afford an ever growing group of uneducated, disengaged citizens – financially, we cannot afford them). So…. How about we tell those young people who have children ‘That’s it – no more welfare for any more kids’. We’ll provide them with alternatives, give them access to birth control and reward them for following a program to help them raise the next generation to have higher expectations. We provide any help they need – housing, drugs, counselling, education We need them to LEARN a better way.

Obviously, the cost of such a program would be significant. Actually, it would be frightening. So, how do we pay for it? Well, that’s where we need to be even more creative. We should get the private sector to fund it. Now the right wing will be screaming at me and the liberals will be thrilled! Work with me…. It’ll get clearer!!

IF we could solve these problems, we could save vast amounts of money. So, we get the private sector to fund it and we pay them back – and we pay them bonuses – from the savings made on a vastly reduced welfare bill. And we could part fund it through bonds – and let ordinary Americans profit from helping their fellow Americans.

Solve that one problem and we can:

1. Cut crime and save money – the more educated someone is, the less likely they are to commit crime. Those with decent jobs are less likely to commit crime. We’d save vast amounts within the justice system, court costs, prison, community sentences, etc.

2. An educated workforce attracts jobs. Instead of haemorrhaging jobs like we are, we would attract inward investment (foreign jobs) into our country.

3. Save vast amounts on welfare, so we could afford to better help those truly deserving it. Those who are not capable of taking care of themselves, the elderly, children, those with mental problems, or physical disabilities.

4. Cut taxes – who doesn’t want more money in their pocket. That money creates jobs, because the more we have, the more we spend – and we wouldn’t have to run up credit to do it.

The whole thing needs to be detailed out but, in general, as a concept, USMB, what do you think?

I know it’s gonna bump up against the Constitution in some areas, and I know it would not be as straightforward as I outline but as a concept…. Would it work or am I just an idealist?

Blah...Blah...Blah...

The problem with education for the last 20 years is more about the hopelessness of the end game. You say you want better education? Then why do you support the policies that make it pointless to get one? The reason to get a better education is to go to a college or a good trade school. The outsourcing of many of our better paying jobs has decimated the middle class. Therefore fewer families can afford to send their kids to a higher education. The kids aren't stupid..they are dissalusioned. They see well educated people from the previous generation struggling to get by. This is the price we pay for not taking care of the interests of the USA over the narrow antiAmerican interests of multinational corporations.

I don't need a better education. I got me one of those.

Blame can be proportioned to both sides on this.... it's not just about the jobs going, it is also about allowing a culture of 'entitlement' and 'welfare for life' attitude. That children are a right, not a privilege and that it's fine and dandy to produce a child at 14. Look big picture - and take off the partisan glasses.

We don't need ALL kids going to University.... we need a huge variety of skills - but the most important thing we need to do for kids is to break the cycle.

I'm not interested in who did what - there's plenty of blame to go around - and it solves nothing.

 

[California Girl]

It appears that we are the tv generation. We can't focus for more than 30 seconds on the actual points without wandering off into partisan politics and bitching about spending.

Neither of which are actually going to create solutions.

 

[HUGGY]

I won’t bother going through the usual ‘who did what, when and who do we blame’ scenario when It comes to decade upon decade of failing the poor, minorities, and black students, high levels of crime and violence, drugs etc. I would, however, like to consider a long term approach to actually fixing the problem. And, it’s not really even about race…. It’s about poverty and expectations. Poverty and low expectations are not a race issue, they are a societal one.

In my view, the issue starts with parents. For reasons that I will not go into (because it’ll just distract from the actual point), we have generation after generation of uneducated Americans whose life appears to be a pattern, outlined below:

Teenage girl, raised by a teenaged single Mom, has sex, gets pregnant, has child. That child knows no other life, sees no other examples in her community and repeats the pattern. So we have intergenerational children raising children, and that not just within families but across whole neighborhoods and communities. Because we have children raising children, those children are raised by Moms (let’s temporarily forget about ‘baby daddy’s’ – I’ll come back to them later) who are ill-prepared to raise a child properly. By ‘properly’, I mean to encourage their child to work hard at school, set boundaries and instil discipline, respect for themselves and other people, and love.

Boys are raised with no male role model, so their view of life is equally stilted. They see females as disposable, children as disposable, and life as something that happens rather than a series of opportunities to seize or ignore. They have kids by different females, most take no responsibility – financially or in any other way.

That’s the pattern. The question for society is this…. Is that acceptable in the United States? I would say no.

We have an intergenerational issue of people with no expectations, breeding another generation with no expectations. That is what we need to address.

So, how do we address it? That’s a really, really hard one… and the answers are not going to be pretty. They will require very hard choices…. And they will require money. Here is what I think we should do:

We need to enforce education on young people. It’s not an optional extra. That means we need to get into the poor communities and show them another way. Sounds easy. It’s not. Because they won’t necessarily want to learn it. But, if we get to the children – and their teenage parents – and insist (not a choice…. I know, I know, the liberals are gonna scream about their rights – and the right will scream about the Constitution…. but we as a society simply cannot afford an ever growing group of uneducated, disengaged citizens – financially, we cannot afford them). So…. How about we tell those young people who have children ‘That’s it – no more welfare for any more kids’. We’ll provide them with alternatives, give them access to birth control and reward them for following a program to help them raise the next generation to have higher expectations. We provide any help they need – housing, drugs, counselling, education We need them to LEARN a better way.

Obviously, the cost of such a program would be significant. Actually, it would be frightening. So, how do we pay for it? Well, that’s where we need to be even more creative. We should get the private sector to fund it. Now the right wing will be screaming at me and the liberals will be thrilled! Work with me…. It’ll get clearer!!

IF we could solve these problems, we could save vast amounts of money. So, we get the private sector to fund it and we pay them back – and we pay them bonuses – from the savings made on a vastly reduced welfare bill. And we could part fund it through bonds – and let ordinary Americans profit from helping their fellow Americans.

Solve that one problem and we can:

1. Cut crime and save money – the more educated someone is, the less likely they are to commit crime. Those with decent jobs are less likely to commit crime. We’d save vast amounts within the justice system, court costs, prison, community sentences, etc.

2. An educated workforce attracts jobs. Instead of haemorrhaging jobs like we are, we would attract inward investment (foreign jobs) into our country.

3. Save vast amounts on welfare, so we could afford to better help those truly deserving it. Those who are not capable of taking care of themselves, the elderly, children, those with mental problems, or physical disabilities.

4. Cut taxes – who doesn’t want more money in their pocket. That money creates jobs, because the more we have, the more we spend – and we wouldn’t have to run up credit to do it.

The whole thing needs to be detailed out but, in general, as a concept, USMB, what do you think?

I know it’s gonna bump up against the Constitution in some areas, and I know it would not be as straightforward as I outline but as a concept…. Would it work or am I just an idealist?

Blah...Blah...Blah...

The problem with education for the last 20 years is more about the hopelessness of the end game. You say you want better education? Then why do you support the policies that make it pointless to get one? The reason to get a better education is to go to a college or a good trade school. The outsourcing of many of our better paying jobs has decimated the middle class. Therefore fewer families can afford to send their kids to a higher education. The kids aren't stupid..they are dissalusioned. They see well educated people from the previous generation struggling to get by. This is the price we pay for not taking care of the interests of the USA over the narrow antiAmerican interests of multinational corporations.

I don't need a better education. I got me one of those.

Blame can be proportioned to both sides on this.... it's not just about the jobs going, it is also about allowing a culture of 'entitlement' and 'welfare for life' attitude. That children are a right, not a privilege and that it's fine and dandy to produce a child at 14. Look big picture - and take off the partisan glasses.

We don't need ALL kids going to University.... we need a huge variety of skills - but the most important thing we need to do for kids is to break the cycle.

I'm not interested in who did what - there's plenty of blame to go around - and it solves nothing.

You cannot expect people to starve just because bad policy made it impossible to get decent employment. Welfare is a whole lot cheaper than crime and incarceration. It is inconvenient to pay more taxes and suffer a larger governmental footprint but until big business and our representatives come to the inevitable conclusion that they have to put americas citizens first and American jobs first there will be no other way to keep this country held together even if it is only with string and bubble gum.

 

[antagon]

I agree. It's kind of where I see the private sector being of assistance. My theory being that if we get young, employed, people as mentors and the companies that those people work for give their employees paid time to participate - as part of a program - run by the state - the employers could be given tax incentives to encourage them to allow employees to participate... Those young, successful people could teach children what it's like to work, help them with basic education, and generally act as role models for kids.... Something achievable for them to strive towards and someone outside their family who gives a shit what happens to them.

i've suggested directly addressing demand for labor in the domestic market because i feel that is the underlying cause for dependence on welfare and the likelihood that someone would see teenage pregnancy in the positive light which those in your cycle do. as a business owner, i would much prefer the support for employment rather than the burden of having to encourage people to work. that sounds selfish, but i feel i help people more by hiring them and treating them well anyhow. cumulatively, the business community spreads this sort of help enough. we could use some help spreading it deeper into the ranks of the habitually unemployed.

this sort of encouragement is a natural dividend of a good day's work; i think some of these multi-generational unemployed are simply never acquainted with this. notwithstanding this, welfare dependency is not a function of poor motivation and laziness alone. these are more consequential to a lack of work than they are the cause. certainly how we feel about working hardly translates to a macroeconomic level. the bottom line is that more jobs need to be generated within our borders, and those borders, along with the rules governing participation in the labor market, need to give the americans on welfare an opportunity to compete.

if this is done through wage-subsidy as i suggest, your international and domestic investment will be reflected on the bottom lines for which businesses can more easily accont than can they the quality of our graduates. the response will furthermore be immediate, rather than the 12-year+ potential returns from a solution directed at the mindsets of kids of welfare recipients.

I think most business owners would agree with you... but, as an interim measure - until we break that cycle (because that's what it is, it's a lifestyle choice for a lot of people - and that is what we have to break)... as a business owner, is it not better to be part of a long term solution rather than be forever burdened with an ever growing 'welfare lifestyle option'?

i just think an alternative solution will fix the problem rather than merely address a symptom... and faster at that.

 

[antagon]

Nonsense.

The correlation is obvious. As Federal Control and spending hae increased, the quality and effectiveness of public education has declined.

As Einstein noted about insanity....

federal control has not increased. the constitution still isolates your beloved but incompetent state governments from direct federal influence. this is why the majority of states still adhere to the look-say method repeatedly shown in congressional inquests and independent studies to be inferior from the fed standard phonics system. the state solution: the whole language method. more state-adopted 'innovation' which fails to produce results.

einstein's axiom does not work in your favor in light of states being wholly responsible for their education systems and the extreme costs which they extort from the tax-funded federal largess and the municipal bond market.

once you educate yourself on the state-to-state failures in education, you would be better placed to pretend you know what you are talking about. until that time, your partisan states' rights one-size-fits-all solution don't fit. sorry.

You're the one who is in need of education. Federal unfunded mandates have driven the spending problems with little result - as well as the collusion of politicians and teachers unions which have overburdened the cost structure with excessive benefits.

In real constant dollar terms, we spend more than triple per pupil for elementary and secondary schools than we did in the 1960s, to the point where it is over $10K.

If all it takes is money and federal mandates to improve education, we should have the most successful schools in the world. Reality is far different, as evidenced by poor literacy and graduation rates. Of course, the reasons behind this poor performance are beyond you as you can only recognize statist faux solutions.

boe: state and local governments are doing all of the spending which you are griping about, then you apply your partisan talking-point about states rights and anti-statism or whatever without realizing that states extort the majority of the federal largess in excess of national defense, and are the several most ambitious sucklers on the teet of our tax proceeds. education is one of their most sturdy begging platforms.

again, your argument does not align with reality, because the vast majority of state and local education boards have not aligned their practices with some of the empirically superior fundamentals of the DOE's advice on education. that's where the poor literacy comes from. that's where the high cost comes from.

 

[antagon]

Blah...Blah...Blah...

The problem with education for the last 20 years is more about the hopelessness of the end game. You say you want better education? Then why do you support the policies that make it pointless to get one? The reason to get a better education is to go to a college or a good trade school. The outsourcing of many of our better paying jobs has decimated the middle class. Therefore fewer families can afford to send their kids to a higher education. The kids aren't stupid..they are dissalusioned. They see well educated people from the previous generation struggling to get by. This is the price we pay for not taking care of the interests of the USA over the narrow antiAmerican interests of multinational corporations.

I don't need a better education. I got me one of those.

Blame can be proportioned to both sides on this.... it's not just about the jobs going, it is also about allowing a culture of 'entitlement' and 'welfare for life' attitude. That children are a right, not a privilege and that it's fine and dandy to produce a child at 14. Look big picture - and take off the partisan glasses.

We don't need ALL kids going to University.... we need a huge variety of skills - but the most important thing we need to do for kids is to break the cycle.

I'm not interested in who did what - there's plenty of blame to go around - and it solves nothing.

i dont think it's fair to write off huggy's angle as particularly partisan. it is up the same vein as my perspective, and that is that there is a deeper root to the issue than the superficial observation that there's an attitude driving your welfare cycle. the reality is that there's some real factors in our economy driving that attitude. these factors include deindustrialization and 'xenoindustrialization'. i'll add domestic wage inflation and and grey/black-market labor competition to the pot. this presents a tangible concern, policy wise, which calls for rolling back some of the zeal which we've pursued post-industrial policy since the 70s.

 

[lizzie]

So, how do we address it? That’s a really, really hard one… and the answers are not going to be pretty. They will require very hard choices…. And they will require money. Here is what I think we should do:

We need to enforce education on young people. It’s not an optional extra. That means we need to get into the poor communities and show them another way. Sounds easy. It’s not. Because they won’t necessarily want to learn it. But, if we get to the children – and their teenage parents – and insist (not a choice…. I know, I know, the liberals are gonna scream about their rights – and the right will scream about the Constitution…. but we as a society simply cannot afford an ever growing group of uneducated, disengaged citizens – financially, we cannot afford them). So…. How about we tell those young people who have children ‘That’s it – no more welfare for any more kids’. We’ll provide them with alternatives, give them access to birth control and reward them for following a program to help them raise the next generation to have higher expectations. We provide any help they need – housing, drugs, counselling, education We need them to LEARN a better way.

You made an excellent post, and you see what the real problem, and I love your ideas, however, they won't work, because you can't force someone to learn and you can't teach someone who was never loved how to love. Unfortunately, many people only learn from one thing. Pain. You can't teach some people how to make a good lives for themselves if they have no interest, and are being supported for making bad choices. The only way we will end the social decay we currently have is by cutting off the gravy train, and letting people suffer the consequences of their own mistakes and bad attitudes. Hunger is one of the best motivators for the human race.

 

[California Girl]

So, how do we address it? That’s a really, really hard one… and the answers are not going to be pretty. They will require very hard choices…. And they will require money. Here is what I think we should do:

We need to enforce education on young people. It’s not an optional extra. That means we need to get into the poor communities and show them another way. Sounds easy. It’s not. Because they won’t necessarily want to learn it. But, if we get to the children – and their teenage parents – and insist (not a choice…. I know, I know, the liberals are gonna scream about their rights – and the right will scream about the Constitution…. but we as a society simply cannot afford an ever growing group of uneducated, disengaged citizens – financially, we cannot afford them). So…. How about we tell those young people who have children ‘That’s it – no more welfare for any more kids’. We’ll provide them with alternatives, give them access to birth control and reward them for following a program to help them raise the next generation to have higher expectations. We provide any help they need – housing, drugs, counselling, education We need them to LEARN a better way.

You made an excellent post, and you see what the real problem, and I love your ideas, however, they won't work, because you can't force someone to learn and you can't teach someone who was never loved how to love. Unfortunately, many people only learn from one thing. Pain. You can't teach some people how to make a good lives for themselves if they have no interest, and are being supported for making bad choices. The only way we will end the social decay we currently have is by cutting off the gravy train, and letting people suffer the consequences of their own mistakes and bad attitudes. Hunger is one of the best motivators for the human race.

I agree, there would be those that we cannot help. But, we can help their children - in order to stop the cycle. It's an idealistic approach, and I don't for one minute think it would 'solve everything'.... I think it would go a long way to fixing a very large proportion of it.

People seem to be misunderstanding what I said. It is not about letting people starve. It is an idea about how we 'encourage' (and, yea, we may need to 'force' some of them) to get up off their asses and help themselves. I volunteer at a homeless center, I find that the majority of homeless don't WANT that life, they just need help to get out of it. Give them that help - as well as feeding them - and you put them back into society, give them some self respect, teach them skills to get and keep a job.... This kind of thing works.

As I said, there is a similar project running in the UK to see how it can impact... The key to it is investment.... but not from taxes, from the private sector - give them the chance to assist, make it worth their while, and we could not just help those people out of the cycle, we can do with without burdening taxpayers... In fact, if we made it work right, it would cut taxes (which conservatives want) and support the disadvantaged (which the liberals want).

 

[antagon]

that's what doesn't sit flush with me: the desperate cling to idealism when pragmatism is far more effective.

 

[Bfgrn]

I won’t bother going through the usual ‘who did what, when and who do we blame’ scenario when It comes to decade upon decade of failing the poor, minorities, and black students, high levels of crime and violence, drugs etc. I would, however, like to consider a long term approach to actually fixing the problem. And, it’s not really even about race…. It’s about poverty and expectations. Poverty and low expectations are not a race issue, they are a societal one.

In my view, the issue starts with parents. For reasons that I will not go into (because it’ll just distract from the actual point), we have generation after generation of uneducated Americans whose life appears to be a pattern, outlined below:

Teenage girl, raised by a teenaged single Mom, has sex, gets pregnant, has child. That child knows no other life, sees no other examples in her community and repeats the pattern. So we have intergenerational children raising children, and that not just within families but across whole neighborhoods and communities. Because we have children raising children, those children are raised by Moms (let’s temporarily forget about ‘baby daddy’s’ – I’ll come back to them later) who are ill-prepared to raise a child properly. By ‘properly’, I mean to encourage their child to work hard at school, set boundaries and instil discipline, respect for themselves and other people, and love.

Boys are raised with no male role model, so their view of life is equally stilted. They see females as disposable, children as disposable, and life as something that happens rather than a series of opportunities to seize or ignore. They have kids by different females, most take no responsibility – financially or in any other way.

That’s the pattern. The question for society is this…. Is that acceptable in the United States? I would say no.

We have an intergenerational issue of people with no expectations, breeding another generation with no expectations. That is what we need to address.

So, how do we address it? That’s a really, really hard one… and the answers are not going to be pretty. They will require very hard choices…. And they will require money. Here is what I think we should do:

We need to enforce education on young people. It’s not an optional extra. That means we need to get into the poor communities and show them another way. Sounds easy. It’s not. Because they won’t necessarily want to learn it. But, if we get to the children – and their teenage parents – and insist (not a choice…. I know, I know, the liberals are gonna scream about their rights – and the right will scream about the Constitution…. but we as a society simply cannot afford an ever growing group of uneducated, disengaged citizens – financially, we cannot afford them). So…. How about we tell those young people who have children ‘That’s it – no more welfare for any more kids’. We’ll provide them with alternatives, give them access to birth control and reward them for following a program to help them raise the next generation to have higher expectations. We provide any help they need – housing, drugs, counselling, education We need them to LEARN a better way.

Obviously, the cost of such a program would be significant. Actually, it would be frightening. So, how do we pay for it? Well, that’s where we need to be even more creative. We should get the private sector to fund it. Now the right wing will be screaming at me and the liberals will be thrilled! Work with me…. It’ll get clearer!!

IF we could solve these problems, we could save vast amounts of money. So, we get the private sector to fund it and we pay them back – and we pay them bonuses – from the savings made on a vastly reduced welfare bill. And we could part fund it through bonds – and let ordinary Americans profit from helping their fellow Americans.

Solve that one problem and we can:

1. Cut crime and save money – the more educated someone is, the less likely they are to commit crime. Those with decent jobs are less likely to commit crime. We’d save vast amounts within the justice system, court costs, prison, community sentences, etc.

2. An educated workforce attracts jobs. Instead of haemorrhaging jobs like we are, we would attract inward investment (foreign jobs) into our country.

3. Save vast amounts on welfare, so we could afford to better help those truly deserving it. Those who are not capable of taking care of themselves, the elderly, children, those with mental problems, or physical disabilities.

4. Cut taxes – who doesn’t want more money in their pocket. That money creates jobs, because the more we have, the more we spend – and we wouldn’t have to run up credit to do it.

The whole thing needs to be detailed out but, in general, as a concept, USMB, what do you think?

I know it’s gonna bump up against the Constitution in some areas, and I know it would not be as straightforward as I outline but as a concept…. Would it work or am I just an idealist?

I just read your post and I concur with most of your ideas. But, what you have hit upon is what many liberals have always believed. If there is a 'silver bullet' that can address a multitude of society's problems it is education.

Unfortunately, your ideas will be met with very stiff opposition, but that opposition will not come from liberals.

The Republicans and the right in America today believe the only way to solve our problems is through punishment. And if that doesn't work, the punishment is just not severe enough. I suggest you research the 1994 Crimes Bill and how Republicans and the right demonized the most constructive part of that bill that included many of your ideas.

In the early to mid 90's Congress crafted a crimes bill. I will not not go into the many unintended consequences of the bill, but the original funding framework called for equal thirds of the money to go to 1) police enforcement 2) prisons 3) crime prevention

The crime prevention part of the bill would go toward education, job training, community engagement by law enforcement, child-centered activities (money for arts and crafts, dance programs, recreational activities, nutrition training, and so forth), assorted inner city youth activity programs, urban parks and recreation, schools (money is to be used "to improve the academic and social development of youths by instituting a collaborative structure that trains and coordinates efforts of social workers, teachers, and principles."), youth development for such activities as "providing youth with life skills" , drug treatment programs in prisons. and facilities like community centers.

Statistics showed that the majority of youth crimes are committed after school lets out and before dinner time. It is not difficult to see what is missing during that time period, adult supervision. So the idea was to provide a safe and supervised facility where these kids could go.

It was during this period that Newt Gingrich and the 'Contract with America' Republicans took over Congress.

The 'Contract with America' Republicans attacked and demonized this part of the bill. They even labeled it and added a racial slur, They called the prevention part of the bill paying for 'midnight basketball'

The real irony of that debate; Police Chiefs from around the country ascended on Washington to lobby Congress FOR the prevention provisions, because they knew that the best way to help law enforcement was not more police or more punishment, it was through education, training and community activism.

 

[antagon]

to be fair, CG aims to employ private sector resources to tackling this cause. i would argue that the third sector already covers these bases, and that that is largely funded by deductible, private contributions, though, so nothing new is being proposed by her in that respect.

proactive diversion is an okay idea, but like other bandaids, when they peel off, like when the subjects become adults or otherwise leave the program, it is difficult to account for sustainable results. the bottom line for me lies in the extent which the productive basis of densely populated urban bases has receded. the ways we've compensated for this are not sustainable, and dont remedy the problem directly enough.

 

[midcan5]

You're getting bogged down in stuff in the 'how we got here' instead of how we SOLVE it. I'm not interested in why, I'm trying to get us to think about how we change where we are. You make glib, partisan, statements.

My point... IF we were to solve the societal problems, then we can unburden American from taxes - to a degree. Because the better educated we are, the easier it is to attract jobs. You cannot MAGIC jobs up - unless they are government jobs and that just increases the tax burden and we don't actually NEED them. What we need is an educated workforce to attract jobs INTO the United States - we need Inward Investment and to stop the flow of jobs OUT of America.

I think I've outlined how, long term, we could achieve that.... IF we were prepared for the hard work it would take to get us there.

You did not answer my answer. You can educate till hell freezes over and you ain't gonna compete with India. Social problems are tied to all the items I mentioned, including attitudes towards pregnancy. You can call them partisan but they are obvious and present. Racism still lives, the statistics demonstrate that. If racism did not exist the stats would be a bit more even, that is unless you think Blacks love the poverty and lack of jobs of the inner city - your focus. Our highest period of taxes had the most equality the nation has seen as my recent thread demonstrates in statistics not BS. Businesses operate for profit, if you think Nike is going to make sneakers here you are more than naive. I think American citizens can solve this if they get together and buy and support American workers and fair wages. I recently posted a piece which stated we have enough educated people - they need a job (I am not looking for it now). You obviously forget the eighties too and the loss of white collar jobs. Many of the people laid off then were college educated, I knew many.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/132972-the-united-states-of-inequality.html

 

[Barb]

My solution to teenage pregnancy is making parents go to classes on how to put the fear in their child. My parents would have supported me if I got pregnant, but I had enough respect for them to not want to let them down. My mom put the fear in me at young age. My parents spanked me, but never beat me, and they didn't have to spank me often. Children don't fear their parents anymore.

I let mine babysit.

 

[Barb]

You're getting bogged down in stuff in the 'how we got here' instead of how we SOLVE it. I'm not interested in why, I'm trying to get us to think about how we change where we are. You make glib, partisan, statements.

My point... IF we were to solve the societal problems, then we can unburden American from taxes - to a degree. Because the better educated we are, the easier it is to attract jobs. You cannot MAGIC jobs up - unless they are government jobs and that just increases the tax burden and we don't actually NEED them. What we need is an educated workforce to attract jobs INTO the United States - we need Inward Investment and to stop the flow of jobs OUT of America.

I think I've outlined how, long term, we could achieve that.... IF we were prepared for the hard work it would take to get us there.

You did not answer my answer. You can educate till hell freezes over and you ain't gonna compete with India. Social problems are tied to all the items I mentioned, including attitudes towards pregnancy. You can call them partisan but they are obvious and present. Racism still lives, the statistics demonstrate that. If racism did not exist the stats would be a bit more even, that is unless you think Blacks love the poverty and lack of jobs of the inner city - your focus. Our highest period of taxes had the most equality the nation has seen as my recent thread demonstrates in statistics not BS. Businesses operate for profit, if you think Nike is going to make sneakers here you are more than naive. I think American citizens can solve this if they get together and buy and support American workers and fair wages. I recently posted a piece which stated we have enough educated people - they need a job (I am not looking for it now). You obviously forget the eighties too and the loss of white collar jobs. Many of the people laid off then were college educated, I knew many.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/132972-the-united-states-of-inequality.html

In theory, attainment of higher education and maintenance of superior grades, the attendance to human capital leads to success, and so success [within that theory] equals virtue. In the labor market, a high school diploma opens doors, a college degree opens more doors, and a graduate degree opens doors to the most highly paid jobs. Conversely, those with little education find many of those doors closed and padlocked. They are also the first to be let go in hard economic times, and in a buyers labor market find their job search harder and longer in duration.

This would suggest that all one has to do is attend to one’s education, but all is not what it seems. There are overlapping causes of lower education and poverty than merely the lack of will to work hard and stay in school. As Schiller explains, “Education attainments themselves are an outcome of an earlier process.” This process includes individual traits and external environments, as well as how wealthy one’s family is during childhood, as wealth provides many of those who succeed with the tools and connections to do so. Education as an investment requires the sacrifice of time spent not doing other things. One of those other things is earning a living. And those whose families can afford to pay for Ivy League educations are also more likely to be able to afford the lower paid internships during college that put them on the fast track to a high paid career when they finish their degrees.

Education rewards for white men are much higher than they are for minorities and women. Men with an undergraduate degree earn much more on average than women who attain graduate education. Consequently, even those with the exact same levels of attainment face hugely disparate income levels, and unequal rewards tend to depress motivation.

While degrees are close to number one on the list of sorting devices used to weed through applicants, greater numbers of graduates do not increase the number of available jobs. Instead, employers raise the demands for education and experience for even lower wage work, putting those with little in the way of education and skills out of work entirely, and causing the economic value of higher education attainment to be lower. This is especially true during times of high unemployment. Accordingly, Schiller questions the usefulness of debating whether changing the structure or availability of education would be better, as improving supply does nothing to increase the number of available jobs.

This all calls into question the correlation people assume between ability and income. Does greater ability really lead to greater rewards, and does income distribution truly reflect the distribution of ability? All people do not have the opportunity or support to fully develop their abilities, so the attainment of measurable degrees and test scores are not indicative of potential. Additionally, income depends on which abilities, knowledge, skills and experiences are currently valued in the labor market. Wage measurements as a comparative tool lead us to assume those with higher incomes have greater ability, but the connection between income and ability is a very loose one, especially so where the opportunity to develop ability is delineated by class, race, and gender. Therefore, while there is an “association” between prosperity, higher education, and ability, there is little “causation,” and a high supply of labor coupled with little demand is a much greater predictor of poverty and low wages than lack of educational attainment by either an individual or a community.

 

[antagon]

a high supply of labor coupled with little demand is a much greater predictor of poverty and low wages than lack of educational attainment by either an individual or a community.

this is right on. the solutions in the OP presume an environment where there is a surplus of jobs available for the labor force, or the classical axiom that a supply (of labor) will illicit its own demand. both of these presumptions are fallacies, anywhere on the planet.

to undertake a consideration of poverty, disenfranchisement and social adhesion in a generally capitalist environment, we have to look at the degree which participation penetrates barriers of education, economic advantage, age, race, sex, etc. but rather than address these issues directly, the aggregate demand for labor has been shown in the past to transcend these obstacles the most effectively. this is why i characterize the obsession with education, racial or sexual equality as superficial to the cause:

there are not enough jobs. it does not matter the type or the qualifications -- the labor market will adapt over time. the demography of those who are put out by this shortage is rhetorical to the solution. it only lends an image of who our society values least. there will likely never be a surplus of employment. there will always be a demographic in this position and it will always adapt to the circumstances through cycles like the one put forward in the OP. if the US wasn't a developed nation with a social safety net, this cycle will entail panning for gold and rummaging through dumpsites as it does in zimbabwe and bangladesh. there are commendable cycles of achievement spanning generations of people adapted to privilege, as well. it is a natural result of the crossroads between apples falling near the tree and our natural capacity for adaptation to our circumstances.

individuals will break these cycles, sometimes at the behest of cumbersome programs orchestrated by the public, private or third sector. however, the issue affecting the aggregate of socially detached is the strength of demand for labor in the job market. that's all. i feel that the microeconomics and personal choices of individuals is marginally in the domain of the government. this is the domain of individuals and communities -- the government should support their values. the macroeconomics and aggregate trends can only fall in the purview of the government. nothing else has the wherewithal or intention for the collective good. history has indicated the effectiveness of policy to turn around trends in the labor market, mitigating their side-effects by extension. policy-level change is required to address the extent which the job market is failing to penetrate the masses accumulating on the safety net, and far be it from our confederate education policy to have but a marginal impact.

 

[midcan5]

There is an interesting elephant in the room that most look past, if we are all college educated who will do the drudge work? Immigrants have done it for a long time. And I do think in all jobs there is much drudgery, as a long time manager, motivating people is always an interesting challenge. Many of the posts above are excellent, I need to review before I comment again. Below article sheds light on much of this conversation, I posted as a thread in Economy.



"Most discussion about inequality in the United States focuses on race and gender. That makes sense, because our society has a conspicuous history of treating blacks differently from whites and women differently from men. Black/white and male/female inequality persist to this day. The median annual income for women working full time is 23 percent lower than for their male counterparts. The median annual income for black families is 38 percent lower than for their white counterparts. The extent to which these imbalances involve lingering racism and sexism or more complex matters of sociology and biology is a topic of much anguished and heated debate."



"...My Slate colleague Hanna Rosin, writing in the Atlantic, recently looked at these and other data and asked, "What if the modern, postindustrial economy is simply more congenial to women than to men?"

She might have asked the same about the modern, postindustrial family. The declining economic value of men as Ward Cleaver-style breadwinners is a significant reason for the rise in single parenthood, which most of the time means children being raised by an unmarried or divorced mother. The percentage of children living with one parent has doubled since 1970, from 12 percent to more than 26 percent in 2004 (see Table 2). Conservatives often decry this trend, and they rightly point out that children who grow up in single-parent homes are much likelier to be poor. "Single mothers seldom command high wages," confirmed David Ellwood and Christopher Jencks, both of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, in a 2004 paper. "They also find it unusually difficult to work long hours." But it would be difficult to attribute much of the Great Divergence to single parenthood, because it increased mostly before 1980, when the Great Divergence was just getting under way. By the early 1990s, the growth trend halted altogether, and though it resumed in the aughts the rate of growth was significantly slower."

Did growing international trade make U.S. incomes less equal? (2) - By Timothy Noah - Slate Magazine