According to the National Center for Children in Poverty there are 1.3 million MORE children living in poverty today than in 2000. Low income families are classified as earning less than $40,000 a year for a family of four. In 2005 there were 28 million children living in low-income families; almost forty percent of all children! Arizona is included in the states where child poverty is over twenty percent and minorities are the group hit the hardest. Overall, twenty eight percent of Latino children live in poor family’s nation wide but Black children suffer the worse; thirty five percent or 3.7 million are poor.
The mothers that Chaudry interviewed know about these statistics all too well. One woman lived with her mother in Ecuador for a year after she had her daughter but chose to come back to the US to raise her instead. For her, it was more important to take care of her child herself even if it was in a shelter and be independent than to live under her mothers rules. While getting place from shelter to shelter, she had to wait long lines, unable to change her daughter’s diaper. Some of the places offered horrible food that made them sick and at other places she wouldn’t sleep all night because the room she was offered didn’t have a lock.
One day she went to find out if she would be placed in a better place and found out she was denied. She was only gone for a few days, but the shelter she was at before threw all of her and her baby’s clothes out. Now she lived with the fear of having her child taken away from her by the Child Protection Services because she was homeless and had nothing. She was lucky to be placed in a shelter not too long after, where she remained for 8 months after that moved into public housing. She was finally stabilized and for many mothers the instability is the toughest condition about being in poverty.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Blog 11
In my Justice and Identity class we recently read an article by David Henry called Class Relations and Social Justice and the Politics of Indifference about a chicken processing plant in Hamlet, North Carolina that accidentally burned down on September 3, 1991. In the plant 25 people, including 18 Black women, were killed and another 56 were seriously injured. These workers earned the minimum wage at the time, $4.25 an hour and could earn up to $5.60 an hour. They had no benefits and no job security and workers claimed that bosses let them have one toilet break a day and they were often cursed at. The working conditions were so awful, in fact, that they caused the deaths of all those people. Workers were trapped inside the building because emergency exit doors were locked.
North Carolina has the lowest number of health inspectors per state, 14 health and 28 safety inspectors, when the recommended federal guidelines call for at least 114 per state. To make up for the difference, federal personnel were supposed act as inspectors but had not visited the plant in its 11 years of operation. The conclusion of the article was that these people were more concerned with making money than investing time and energy to see to the needs of the poor working class minority.
The poor, especially poor working women are simply not a top concern for the powers that be. The government seems to de indifferent to the issue of proper working conditions for the poor. What makes a government act, according to the article, are the implications of political opinion on elections, which are rarely issues that have to do with women in poverty. Also, the media also made no fuss about this event at the time because it occurred when Rodney King was all over the news. So those who were concerned with racial injustice, if they even heard about this, were too busy to care about a few deaths in small plant in North Carolina anyway. In regards to women’s justice, most advocates were concerned with Anita Hill’s accusations against associate justice of the Supreme Court, Clarence Thomas.
North Carolina has the lowest number of health inspectors per state, 14 health and 28 safety inspectors, when the recommended federal guidelines call for at least 114 per state. To make up for the difference, federal personnel were supposed act as inspectors but had not visited the plant in its 11 years of operation. The conclusion of the article was that these people were more concerned with making money than investing time and energy to see to the needs of the poor working class minority.
The poor, especially poor working women are simply not a top concern for the powers that be. The government seems to de indifferent to the issue of proper working conditions for the poor. What makes a government act, according to the article, are the implications of political opinion on elections, which are rarely issues that have to do with women in poverty. Also, the media also made no fuss about this event at the time because it occurred when Rodney King was all over the news. So those who were concerned with racial injustice, if they even heard about this, were too busy to care about a few deaths in small plant in North Carolina anyway. In regards to women’s justice, most advocates were concerned with Anita Hill’s accusations against associate justice of the Supreme Court, Clarence Thomas.
Blog 10
Ten years ago Clinton proposed to “end welfare as we know it” through training and education, childcare and medical service to liberate people who were stuck in the welfare system. He said that people must work because welfare is a second chance not a way of life. The result was that TANF gave women positive incentives that they never had to get out of poverty. In fact poverty rates for all children fell and especially for black children whose poverty rates fell by twenty five percent.
Although these are great successes, most families say that even though they are working, they aren’t making it out of poverty. In order to find a job, women need to attend weekly meetings that they can’t miss or else they’ll lose their TANF benefits. When they do find a job, physically getting can be a challenge and make ends meet is still an obstacle because a lot of the jobs available only offer minimum wage salaries. Even with a large number of people at work, they are still not self-sufficient because many are still depending on other forms of public assistance to care for their families. It is estimated that 60% of the families who lost cash benefits have signed up for Medicaid, food stamps and disability benefits. Unless problems like day care, transportation are fully addressed it may be impossible to move TANF to the next level. (NPR.org)
After the welfare reform women had to used various adaptive strategies to survive. They had find ways to make their work schedules coordinate with their child care schedules. Also, they had to budget the little money they had and fight to get what they didn’t have from public assistance. After the welfare reform they especially had to fight for “work” subsidies to obtain center based child care. Center care was the best option available because it provided more subsidies, was more flexible and stable and usually provided educational activities for their children. Also the agency workers were knowledgeable and helpful to mothers who needed help “working the system”.
These survival strategies show the interrelations between work and care through the welfare-to-work programs. Many mothers turned to these programs to find work and to take advantage of the subsidies offered for child care. Although they were finding work there was still the challenge of finding ways to be flexible with there schedules. For example, like Brittany from chapter 3, she had an internship way across town on top of another job that were both extremely far from her home and her child care provider. She had to use the employ a strategy mean leaving her daughter in the care of her sister for days at a time because it would be utterly impossible to make it to all four locations and back on the same day.
Chaudry’s recommendations on the welfare reform were that the government should increase funding for children’s programs and unify the system. He also thinks that the government should create a policy that acknowledges single mothers in the working world. He suggests that jobs be set up to where people can earn higher wages over time in order to break the poverty cycle. There should be less red tape! Public assistance programs should be easier to access and simpler in general. They should also be coordinated in a way that is educational and beneficial for children.
Robert Rector, who co-created the welfare reform of 1996, had very dissimilar recommendations. He believes these women should have finished school before they started their families. He wants the percentage of women who have children out of wed-lock, thirty-eight percent, to decrease dramatically. He also thinks that everyone needs to work and contribute to the labor force. It was suggested that education is the only real way to get out of poverty and secure employment but he doesn’t think that the program should support mothers going back to school. She claims that is expects them to be on the payroll and not to go back to school.
Vivyan Adair, associate professor of women's studies at Hamilton College agrees more with Chaudry’s views. She thinks that those who are willing and able to work and attend school and care for their families should be encouraged to lift themselves out of poverty. She thinks we should we support and reward women who have had children out of wedlock and want to go to school. They should not be viewed as unworthy and incapable because is so we are shunning an entire population that has massive potential.
The last videos made it clear that anti-poverty policies still need to be reformed. In Waukesha Wisconsin, the Salvation Army passes out lunches to 5 days a week to children who would otherwise go without food. These are the children who depend on the free lunch programs during the school year but struggle have food in their bellies during the summer. In Reno, Nevada, there are currently 170 people in living in tent city. In the last 23 years Nevada’s unemployment rate jumped almost 60 percent in the last year. The problem is that the rate of pay is staying the same while cost of living is rising.
Although these are great successes, most families say that even though they are working, they aren’t making it out of poverty. In order to find a job, women need to attend weekly meetings that they can’t miss or else they’ll lose their TANF benefits. When they do find a job, physically getting can be a challenge and make ends meet is still an obstacle because a lot of the jobs available only offer minimum wage salaries. Even with a large number of people at work, they are still not self-sufficient because many are still depending on other forms of public assistance to care for their families. It is estimated that 60% of the families who lost cash benefits have signed up for Medicaid, food stamps and disability benefits. Unless problems like day care, transportation are fully addressed it may be impossible to move TANF to the next level. (NPR.org)
After the welfare reform women had to used various adaptive strategies to survive. They had find ways to make their work schedules coordinate with their child care schedules. Also, they had to budget the little money they had and fight to get what they didn’t have from public assistance. After the welfare reform they especially had to fight for “work” subsidies to obtain center based child care. Center care was the best option available because it provided more subsidies, was more flexible and stable and usually provided educational activities for their children. Also the agency workers were knowledgeable and helpful to mothers who needed help “working the system”.
These survival strategies show the interrelations between work and care through the welfare-to-work programs. Many mothers turned to these programs to find work and to take advantage of the subsidies offered for child care. Although they were finding work there was still the challenge of finding ways to be flexible with there schedules. For example, like Brittany from chapter 3, she had an internship way across town on top of another job that were both extremely far from her home and her child care provider. She had to use the employ a strategy mean leaving her daughter in the care of her sister for days at a time because it would be utterly impossible to make it to all four locations and back on the same day.
Chaudry’s recommendations on the welfare reform were that the government should increase funding for children’s programs and unify the system. He also thinks that the government should create a policy that acknowledges single mothers in the working world. He suggests that jobs be set up to where people can earn higher wages over time in order to break the poverty cycle. There should be less red tape! Public assistance programs should be easier to access and simpler in general. They should also be coordinated in a way that is educational and beneficial for children.
Robert Rector, who co-created the welfare reform of 1996, had very dissimilar recommendations. He believes these women should have finished school before they started their families. He wants the percentage of women who have children out of wed-lock, thirty-eight percent, to decrease dramatically. He also thinks that everyone needs to work and contribute to the labor force. It was suggested that education is the only real way to get out of poverty and secure employment but he doesn’t think that the program should support mothers going back to school. She claims that is expects them to be on the payroll and not to go back to school.
Vivyan Adair, associate professor of women's studies at Hamilton College agrees more with Chaudry’s views. She thinks that those who are willing and able to work and attend school and care for their families should be encouraged to lift themselves out of poverty. She thinks we should we support and reward women who have had children out of wedlock and want to go to school. They should not be viewed as unworthy and incapable because is so we are shunning an entire population that has massive potential.
The last videos made it clear that anti-poverty policies still need to be reformed. In Waukesha Wisconsin, the Salvation Army passes out lunches to 5 days a week to children who would otherwise go without food. These are the children who depend on the free lunch programs during the school year but struggle have food in their bellies during the summer. In Reno, Nevada, there are currently 170 people in living in tent city. In the last 23 years Nevada’s unemployment rate jumped almost 60 percent in the last year. The problem is that the rate of pay is staying the same while cost of living is rising.
Working Poor Women’s Paid Labor (POST 8)
Urban poverty is basically joblessness that causes people (especially single mothers) to go into welfare and concentrated poverty. Neighborhoods, like Jessica’s from the profiles of women workers, are increasingly crime ridden and she fears for her children’s safety because of drugs and violence. Mothers also worry about the schools their children attend in places where urban poverty is rampant. These schools have poor standards and have diminished aspects for the student’s learning. Even if the mother creates strong personal ties with her children, raising them is none-the-less negatively affected by distrust, fear, uncertainty and economic dependence.
Women in mixed income neighborhoods don’t have to worry as much about the fathers of their children getting sent to jail and the impact that can have on their children. These women don’t have to worry about their children seeing how lucrative and attractive dealing drugs can be as they would in an urbanely poor neighborhood. Also mothers in mixed neighborhoods worry less about their daughters becoming pregnant at a young age or their sons getting involved in violence and gang membership.
It is important to note that urban poverty not only affects mothers and children, it also affects the elderly and men. The elderly in poverty may have to choose between having heat in their homes, food on the table and buying medication that they need, according to the American Low Wage Worker’s Tour video. Men in poverty, especially men of color, have the least flexible jobs of all. This may limit how involved they are in their children’s lives.
Job flexibility can really affect the lives of those living in urban poverty, especially if they get sick. Since many have no sick leave, they go to work sick. If their kid gets sick at school they have to choose between picking them up or getting fired. Many people living in urban poverty work two jobs like the woman who is bus driver and also works for janitorial service, and has no sick says or vacation days and can’t afford the health insurance. She had gull stones removed and had to use all the money she saved over 9 months for a new car. Another time she got an upper respiratory viral infection and she had to pay about $400 out of pocket and lost 2 days of work.
Women in mixed income neighborhoods don’t have to worry as much about the fathers of their children getting sent to jail and the impact that can have on their children. These women don’t have to worry about their children seeing how lucrative and attractive dealing drugs can be as they would in an urbanely poor neighborhood. Also mothers in mixed neighborhoods worry less about their daughters becoming pregnant at a young age or their sons getting involved in violence and gang membership.
It is important to note that urban poverty not only affects mothers and children, it also affects the elderly and men. The elderly in poverty may have to choose between having heat in their homes, food on the table and buying medication that they need, according to the American Low Wage Worker’s Tour video. Men in poverty, especially men of color, have the least flexible jobs of all. This may limit how involved they are in their children’s lives.
Job flexibility can really affect the lives of those living in urban poverty, especially if they get sick. Since many have no sick leave, they go to work sick. If their kid gets sick at school they have to choose between picking them up or getting fired. Many people living in urban poverty work two jobs like the woman who is bus driver and also works for janitorial service, and has no sick says or vacation days and can’t afford the health insurance. She had gull stones removed and had to use all the money she saved over 9 months for a new car. Another time she got an upper respiratory viral infection and she had to pay about $400 out of pocket and lost 2 days of work.
Working Poor Women’s Paid Labor (BLOG 7)
Some of the factors that contribute to the instability that Julia faces began right after the birth of her daughter Jacqueline. She was finally able to leave the homeless shelter and was placed in section 8 housing. Her boyfriend lived with her and her two other daughters so he provided the childcare at first but moved out after a few months and ended up in jail. Since she was placed in public housing she lost her food stamp benefits and feared her and her daughters would starve to death. When they were really struggling, her sister Izzy move in with them to help her watch the girls. They alternated shifts working at the Burger Joint but unfortunately the new job meant her sister couldn’t always babysit and Julia had to stop taking computer and GED classes.
Shortly after, she began WEP, the Work Experience Program because she couldn’t work at the Burger Joint for too long or she would lose her public assistance. This was supposed to help her pay for child care but they were always late sending checks. When she found a woman from the CWP program to look after her daughters, the arrangement ended because Julia couldn’t pay her on time because her checks were late. When that arrangement fell through she asked her cousin if she would watch the girls because she figured since she was family she would endure the late payments.
Her cousin did tolerate not getting paid sometimes, but she could not tolerate not getting paid at all. When the welfare agency moved offices they lost Julia’s paper work and stopped paying her altogether. This caused the arrangement with Julia’s cousin to also fall through because she wouldn’t work for free. All this happened around the time that Julia finally qualified for ACD and was able to send her kids to a fabulous caregiver named Sonia. She got her full time job after completing five welfare to work programs and in the end lost all of her public assistance altogether for having a decent job.
Stories like Julia’s are not uncommon for people trying to live on minimum wage. Having a minimum wage job means that mothers like Jessica need to make sacrifices for their children to provide stable and safe childcare and make a better living. They live pay-check to pay-check. For example, she mentions having to sacrifice eating dinner sometimes in order to put enough food on the table for her four kids. Having a minimum wage job means the only housing she can afford has holes in the walls and is in the roughest part of town. She can’t let her kids pay outside for fear of them getting shot and killed and they sell drugs next door.
She feels that living on a minimum wage salary is a battle. When she considered looking for another job, employers only offered a starting pay of what she made before. She feels it is just not fair to have to start from the bottom all over again and still make the same pay. She wants to be able to buys shoes for her kids from a regular store and not the thrift store. She wants to be able to fix her cars transmission without worrying about whether or not she’ll be able to afford rent. She says the battle won’t end until society changes end and there is an effective leader who takes action and actually cares about people having food on their table and providing affordable health care to be able to die respectfully.
Shortly after, she began WEP, the Work Experience Program because she couldn’t work at the Burger Joint for too long or she would lose her public assistance. This was supposed to help her pay for child care but they were always late sending checks. When she found a woman from the CWP program to look after her daughters, the arrangement ended because Julia couldn’t pay her on time because her checks were late. When that arrangement fell through she asked her cousin if she would watch the girls because she figured since she was family she would endure the late payments.
Her cousin did tolerate not getting paid sometimes, but she could not tolerate not getting paid at all. When the welfare agency moved offices they lost Julia’s paper work and stopped paying her altogether. This caused the arrangement with Julia’s cousin to also fall through because she wouldn’t work for free. All this happened around the time that Julia finally qualified for ACD and was able to send her kids to a fabulous caregiver named Sonia. She got her full time job after completing five welfare to work programs and in the end lost all of her public assistance altogether for having a decent job.
Stories like Julia’s are not uncommon for people trying to live on minimum wage. Having a minimum wage job means that mothers like Jessica need to make sacrifices for their children to provide stable and safe childcare and make a better living. They live pay-check to pay-check. For example, she mentions having to sacrifice eating dinner sometimes in order to put enough food on the table for her four kids. Having a minimum wage job means the only housing she can afford has holes in the walls and is in the roughest part of town. She can’t let her kids pay outside for fear of them getting shot and killed and they sell drugs next door.
She feels that living on a minimum wage salary is a battle. When she considered looking for another job, employers only offered a starting pay of what she made before. She feels it is just not fair to have to start from the bottom all over again and still make the same pay. She wants to be able to buys shoes for her kids from a regular store and not the thrift store. She wants to be able to fix her cars transmission without worrying about whether or not she’ll be able to afford rent. She says the battle won’t end until society changes end and there is an effective leader who takes action and actually cares about people having food on their table and providing affordable health care to be able to die respectfully.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Costs of Childcare
The second chapter in Putting Children First descried the challenges and constraints involved in child care choices. The first mother, Brittany, found it challenging to find adequate childcare while she finished a welfare-to-work program. Since she couldn’t afford an actual childcare provider she left her 7 month old daughter with the baby’s uncle. She soon found that he was unreliable and started leaving her baby with her sister but this too was a challenge because she would have to leave her there for days at a time and missed her terribly. (Chaudry, pg. 28-32)
Mothers like Brittany have to make child care choices that are usually constrained by several factors beyond their control. The child can limit her childcare choices depending on his or her age, health, and special needs. The mother’s job requirements, resources and attitudes about a particular establishment can also be factors that constrain her choices. Of course cost, availability, location and regulations can constrain her choices as well. For example after Brittany had kin care, she switched to an informal care arrangement that failed because it was too expensive and she didn’t trust the provider. Also, after waiting three years to receive assistance from the ADC, her choice to leave her child there was constrained because there was no availability.
The ranges of child care used by other low-income mothers are varied and include kin care, informal care, family day care and center care. Kin care is when a family member cares for the child usually a grandmother or a sibling. The pros of kin care are that the mother trusts the caregiver and they can usually provide care for free or very cheap but the concerns are that this care is usually short term and may provide less developmental activities. Informal care is where a neighbor, friend or acquaintance cares for the child usually cheaply but there is a concern about trust and care elements like cost, food and diapers are not negotiable. Family day care is given by a licensed provider in their home with other children. Center care is a public establishment run by the government or private business which is the most structured form of child care but also the most expensive.
Most of the concerns that mothers have is about their children’s development and whether or not there is enough structure and activities for them at their childcare. If there are only few children being watched together the child will miss out on developing interactional skills with other peers. On the other hand there could be too many children and the child may not receive enough individualized attention. One mother, Uma, said that her child was not getting the specialized care necessary for proper development. She says that at the Head Start program her son attended there were too many special needs kids for one classroom but she couldn’t complain since it was free.
All mothers are concerned not only about the child’s development but also about the child’s safety in general based on the competence of the caregiver be cared for in a healthy and safe environment, but unfortunately oftentimes this is not the case. According to a study conducted by the Applied Research Center, in the states of Alabama, California and Maryland revealed that the national childcare standards in many childcare centers are non-existent, not enforced or inadequate. In Alabama for example unlicensed childcare centers have the State’s permission to ignore the standards which account for basic health and safety standards. In California, the standards are enforced in all establishments but there is not enough funding to adequately check each place. (www.arc.org)
Mothers like Brittany have to make child care choices that are usually constrained by several factors beyond their control. The child can limit her childcare choices depending on his or her age, health, and special needs. The mother’s job requirements, resources and attitudes about a particular establishment can also be factors that constrain her choices. Of course cost, availability, location and regulations can constrain her choices as well. For example after Brittany had kin care, she switched to an informal care arrangement that failed because it was too expensive and she didn’t trust the provider. Also, after waiting three years to receive assistance from the ADC, her choice to leave her child there was constrained because there was no availability.
The ranges of child care used by other low-income mothers are varied and include kin care, informal care, family day care and center care. Kin care is when a family member cares for the child usually a grandmother or a sibling. The pros of kin care are that the mother trusts the caregiver and they can usually provide care for free or very cheap but the concerns are that this care is usually short term and may provide less developmental activities. Informal care is where a neighbor, friend or acquaintance cares for the child usually cheaply but there is a concern about trust and care elements like cost, food and diapers are not negotiable. Family day care is given by a licensed provider in their home with other children. Center care is a public establishment run by the government or private business which is the most structured form of child care but also the most expensive.
Most of the concerns that mothers have is about their children’s development and whether or not there is enough structure and activities for them at their childcare. If there are only few children being watched together the child will miss out on developing interactional skills with other peers. On the other hand there could be too many children and the child may not receive enough individualized attention. One mother, Uma, said that her child was not getting the specialized care necessary for proper development. She says that at the Head Start program her son attended there were too many special needs kids for one classroom but she couldn’t complain since it was free.
All mothers are concerned not only about the child’s development but also about the child’s safety in general based on the competence of the caregiver be cared for in a healthy and safe environment, but unfortunately oftentimes this is not the case. According to a study conducted by the Applied Research Center, in the states of Alabama, California and Maryland revealed that the national childcare standards in many childcare centers are non-existent, not enforced or inadequate. In Alabama for example unlicensed childcare centers have the State’s permission to ignore the standards which account for basic health and safety standards. In California, the standards are enforced in all establishments but there is not enough funding to adequately check each place. (www.arc.org)
Identifying the Working Poor
In the 1960’s one in four women who had children less than six years old worked outside the home. By the year 2000, a remarkable two-thirds of all women worked outside the home. Aside from the feminist movement, this increase is due in part to the strong work requirements of the welfare reform of 1996. It put women in a position of making a difficult decision; either stay home with their children and lose welfare or go to work and pay for child care. Many chose the former and found that life was more difficult to afford than before.
Those who went to work and were already poor found that they only had access to jobs that paid minimum wage. Since they earned wages below the poverty line, they were classified as the working poor. Currently, an estimated 2.8 million working families are poor. Chaudry argues that the government wants those who are impoverished to simply work harder, but often times those who are part of the working class poor are working the hardest. In fact, many of them work over 60 hours a week and possibly work two jobs yet they still can’t pay their bills because their wages are so low.
A group of people called the near-poor experience similar struggles as the working poor. There are an estimated 53 million people considered as near poor whose wages come in at 100 percent to 200 percent of the poverty line. The federal poverty guideline standards can be really harsh on these families because even if they make a dollar over the threshold they will be denied support they actually need. Government policies are not the only factors contributing to our nation’s poverty.
There are thousands of people in Milwaukie who currently find themselves in the working-poor and near poor categories after they lost their jobs due to globalization. Several top companies found that they would save a lot of money by exporting jobs to other countries and paying foreign workers a fraction of what they would pay American workers. This left 60 thousand people competing for 8 thousand jobs. Many families had to go to local churches to accept food donations when before they were the ones donating food.
Overall, one in eight people in American live below the poverty and 12 million are children. There are 33 million people without health insurance most of those are the working poor. Poverty affects every type of person in different ways and for different reasons. The middle class who cannot afford to pay their bills and what to maintain the middle class lifestyle, live on credit to avoid the poverty stigma and have a negative net worth. This is called asset poverty. Elder poverty is the poverty of senior citizens who cannot afford health care and can no longer work. Child poverty is the poverty of children who suffer in the classroom because their brains are malnourished. Generational poverty is poverty that goes on for two generations or more. These people grow up with the mindset that they will never get out of poverty so they never do.
Those who went to work and were already poor found that they only had access to jobs that paid minimum wage. Since they earned wages below the poverty line, they were classified as the working poor. Currently, an estimated 2.8 million working families are poor. Chaudry argues that the government wants those who are impoverished to simply work harder, but often times those who are part of the working class poor are working the hardest. In fact, many of them work over 60 hours a week and possibly work two jobs yet they still can’t pay their bills because their wages are so low.
A group of people called the near-poor experience similar struggles as the working poor. There are an estimated 53 million people considered as near poor whose wages come in at 100 percent to 200 percent of the poverty line. The federal poverty guideline standards can be really harsh on these families because even if they make a dollar over the threshold they will be denied support they actually need. Government policies are not the only factors contributing to our nation’s poverty.
There are thousands of people in Milwaukie who currently find themselves in the working-poor and near poor categories after they lost their jobs due to globalization. Several top companies found that they would save a lot of money by exporting jobs to other countries and paying foreign workers a fraction of what they would pay American workers. This left 60 thousand people competing for 8 thousand jobs. Many families had to go to local churches to accept food donations when before they were the ones donating food.
Overall, one in eight people in American live below the poverty and 12 million are children. There are 33 million people without health insurance most of those are the working poor. Poverty affects every type of person in different ways and for different reasons. The middle class who cannot afford to pay their bills and what to maintain the middle class lifestyle, live on credit to avoid the poverty stigma and have a negative net worth. This is called asset poverty. Elder poverty is the poverty of senior citizens who cannot afford health care and can no longer work. Child poverty is the poverty of children who suffer in the classroom because their brains are malnourished. Generational poverty is poverty that goes on for two generations or more. These people grow up with the mindset that they will never get out of poverty so they never do.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
