Barb
Carpe Scrotum
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.
exactly!