Expenses Up + Wages Down = Homelessness

froggy

Gold Member
Aug 18, 2009
12,484
2,648
245
New Yorkers are increasingly in danger of becoming homeless. According to new research released by the Women's Center for Education and Career Advancement, living expenses have increased at a faster rate in recent days than wages for families living in New York City. Not a surprise, perhaps, but a fact that makes getting by harder and harder for countless families.

The study, The Self-Sufficiency Standard for the City of New York 2010 (pdf), "measures how much income a family of a certain composition in a given place must earn to meet their basic needs. Employers, advocates, and legislators can use it to evaluate wages, provide career counseling and create programs that lead to self-sufficiency for working families." Previous reports were issued in 2004 (pdf) and 2000. (Guess legislators didn't use them to create enough programs.) This time around the study found that "[o]ver the past decade the cost of meeting basic needs in New York City has increased considerably while median earnings among New York City workers has increased at a much lower rate .... The Self-Sufficiency Standard shows that earnings well above the official Federal Poverty Level are nevertheless far below what is needed to meet families' basic needs in New York City."

This is something the city has been aware of for some time. Government standards of measuring poverty do not take into account expenses like housing, medical costs and child care, so the city included them in its new measure and found 300,000 people in poverty who previously hadn't been considered poor. When NYC factored in these expenses (which are often a large chunk of the average NYC family's living expenses) the study determined that poverty rose around seven percent from 2005 to 2008, even though the national statistics found that poverty fell by eight percent during that time.

Often this is the exact equation that can lead to homelessness and, in particular, family homelessness. Many New York City families already live paycheck to paycheck and are in danger of losing their homes by being this vulnerable. Add in an unforeseen expense, such as a large medical bill or increase in child care costs, and a family is often left with no other option but to lose their home.

Thankfully, the nation has followed New York City's lead in considering these geographic variables. In March of this year, the Obama administration adopted a new version of the formula that was created close to 50 years ago. Now factors like health care costs, housing and utilities will be factored in, creating a more realistic picture of the vast expenses a family is up against on a daily basis. The new standards will be rolled out next year. Though not binding in terms of benefit distribution, hopefully these findings will lead to more comprehensive services and just maybe an increase in wages across the board.

No matter how poverty is measured, the reality is that far too many people are in danger of becoming homeless for the simple fact that their income does not adequately cover the necessary costs of daily living. Many housing subsidies require people to work, yet if a person does not earn enough to cover the cost, the vicious cycle of poverty and homelessness continues. Our country expects a lot of its citizens; it's time that we expect more from our country.

This is not only the case in NY it's happening all across America. When will the employer realize this and balance it out?



http://homelessness.change.org/blog/view/expenses_up_wages_down_homelessness
 
When will the employer realize this and balance it out?

employer?

excuse me?

it's the employer's responsibility as to weather their employee's are leading a fruitful lifestyle?

etta> the article doesn't say that, apparently you did Froggy.

care to expand on it?
 
Last edited:
When will the employer realize this and balance it out?

employer?

excuse me?

it's the employer's responsibility as to weather their employee's are leading a fruitful lifestyle?

etta> the article doesn't say that, apparently you did Froggy.

care to expand on it?

When it cost more to live than one earns something has to give. If the Govt raises minimum wage the the cost of living goes up also. Where else does the raise in wage come from without increasing the cost of living
 
well MW is just one component of any given economy Froggy, points for true Kenyesian thinking, but couldn't we include a world of factors that would also fall under said term?
 
well MW is just one component of any given economy Froggy, points for true Kenyesian thinking, but couldn't we include a world of factors that would also fall under said term?

So where does the fix come in? And we already see this admin has no intention of concentrating on job creation, who's going to step up and take charge of that.
 
It comes in skills, woman are not immune from acquiring them. If your talking about minimum wage your talking about lazy no skilled people.
 
If you read my musings on How will life in 2050 be like? you will see WHY people are finding it more difficult to make ends meet.

And right now we do NOT have a system to deal with this growing problem.

The problems we are having are way more complex than merely the real estate and banking meltdown, folks.

This depression is a symptom, not the root cause, of the real problem.

FREE TRADE is merely part of it, too.

Mankind's economy is changing rapidly because tecnology is making people redundant.

Naturally this change in production is hitting some people harder than others, but this change is going to effect all but the most highly skilled and inventive and creative people.

And our economic system is based on having 90-95% of adults working and CONSUMING...not 10 or 20%!

But our econmic system is now about the business of making most people worthless.

Now there's a techho-formula for social disaster in the making.

No, NOT in the making, it's already cooking on the stove of history

It's a pot that is boiling, and this pot is going to boil over sooner or later.
 
Last edited:
Uneducated people are, I'll agree with that much. Back in the seventies what maybe 10 to 15% got college degree's now its passing 25%, and there are many more trade skills that didn't even exist back then. So to all the glass half emptiers I'm a glass 3/4 fuller.
As the economy gains in complexity the advantage of an education grows, we have all heard about the gap between the rich and the poor. You can almost chart income to eduction level.
The middle class family has way more assets and net worth now than 40 years ago and in 40 years they will have exponentially more.
 
It comes in skills, woman are not immune from acquiring them. If your talking about minimum wage your talking about lazy no skilled people.

I'm talking of the middle class who burden the load of it all.
 
Uneducated people are, I'll agree with that much. Back in the seventies what maybe 10 to 15% got college degree's now its passing 25%, and there are many more trade skills that didn't even exist back then. So to all the glass half emptiers I'm a glass 3/4 fuller.
As the economy gains in complexity the advantage of an education grows, we have all heard about the gap between the rich and the poor. You can almost chart income to eduction level.
The middle class family has way more assets and net worth now than 40 years ago and in 40 years they will have exponentially more.


I believe that in the race between human education and technological advancement that can replace human intelligence?

In the medium run humans lose.

The answer is IN PART might be education, but we cannot make a silk purse'n out of a sow's ear, TS.

Technology and AI is going to replace Doctors and Rocket scientists in our lifetimes.

What are we going to educate ourselves to do when THAT happens?

And let's face it, the BELL CURVE indicates that we're not ALL going to be economically viably educatable, anyway.

This problem is ALREADY here.

And it's going to come on faster as techology advances ITSELF, as its been doing for our entire lifetimes.

40 more years of this accelerating trend toward making workers reduntant?

Education isn't going to solve that problem, TS.

Its just going to educate enough of us to understand why we're in trouble, at best.
 
Last edited:
Uneducated people are, I'll agree with that much. Back in the seventies what maybe 10 to 15% got college degree's now its passing 25%, and there are many more trade skills that didn't even exist back then. So to all the glass half emptiers I'm a glass 3/4 fuller.
As the economy gains in complexity the advantage of an education grows, we have all heard about the gap between the rich and the poor. You can almost chart income to eduction level.
The middle class family has way more assets and net worth now than 40 years ago and in 40 years they will have exponentially more.


I believe that in the race between human education and technological advancement that can replace human intelligence?

In the medium run humans lose.

The answer is IN PART might be education, but we cannot make a silk purse'n out of a sow's ear, TS.

Technology and AI is going to replace Doctors and Rocket scientists in our lifetimes.

What are we going to educate ourselves to do when THAT happens?

And let's face it, the BELL CURVE indicates that we're not ALL going to be economically viably educatable, anyway.

This problem is ALREADY here.

And it's going to come on faster as techology advances ITSELF, as its been doing for our entire lifetimes.

40 more years of this accelerating trend toward making workers reduntant?

Education isn't going to solve that problem, TS.

Its just going to educate enough of us to understand why we're in trouble, at best.

wow, there are chicken littles and chicken littles on steroids.
So bypass the fact that we are way better off than say the seventies!!!
so throw out some new reason to fear and see if that sticks to a wall.
I say wars and racism are 1,000% more valid concerns than non existant AI.:cuckoo:
 

Forum List

Back
Top