Immigration Policies and the Poor

While our great nation was founded and built by the minds and labor of immigrants, the subject has taken on a starkly different meaning in recent decades. The issue, as I see it, is finite resources and who can and should have access to them. I am deeply troubled by how Hispanic the United States has become: I should not have to press 1 for English when calling a business, nor should citizens be shut out for jobs because they are not bilingual. That having been said, monies spent on providing services to illegal immigrants is a huge waste of money. Huge. I am no more an advocate for embracing illegals than I am doing the same for someone who breaks into my house and decides the living room is theirs.

That being said, however, I do not in any way advocate any element of discriminatory behavior. All people are entitled to dignity and fair treatment. We simply do not have the resources to accept the continuing glut of illegals. I do believe that very cheap labor in the form of immigrant workers is exploitive and drives down wages. And, es, I would be willing to pay more for produce and other goods and services to support legitimate wages and jobs for citizens. Part of the reason that farms hire migrant workers so cheaply is because others would be hesitant to do the same work for the meager wages.

I think legal immigration is down because illegal immigration has become so easy and it takes so long to get citizenship legitimately. Both of these must change. Border states, such as California and Texas have high rates, but non-border states, such as Georgia and even Delaware are seeing increases, as well. Many Mexican illegal immigrants are essentially sold into slavery to come to the U.S. It is a thriving business.

Health care and education are among the services provided en masse for illegal immigrants that we simply cannot afford. We have legitimate citizens in need of services and monies are being wasted.

Policies to curtail immigration seem to send mix messages: on the one hand, it limits access to some entitlements but also rewards those who have been hiding out long enough to get amnesty.
Then there are security issues post September 11th: could a terrorist get into the U.S. by first coming through Canada? I think we should put a 15 year total freeze on immigration while we sort out the costs and solutions to address illegal activity. If we have stringent laws in place - and enforce them - it might discourage border activity. Some might view that as racist against Mexico, but let's face it. We only share a border with two other countries and there are not floods of Canadians coming into the U.S. If we shared a border with Yugoslavia, I would have the same view.

The issue of illegal immigration is one of complacency and security. If your home is repeatedly broken into, it's time to take a serious look at why.

Housing and Community Development

I am pleased with revisions in public housing policy that integrates families into communities, rather than isolate them in segregated public housing. Historically, these have been havens for criminal activity. Children suffer especially because of crime, drug use, and substandard concentrations in school. By allowing people to live in mainstream communities, this helps to alleviate these problems. Particularly, the voucher system is a win-win for all involved: the program costs less to administer, provides more traditional home settings for enrollees and makes good use for otherwise vacant properties in neighborhoods. The children also have the opportunity to attend more optimal academic and social settings.

I am also pleased with President Obama's approach to urban recovery, in that the problems that affect urban areas are interconnected and must be addressed appropriately. Indeed, several of the topics that we have discussed in this course are interrelated to the issue of inadequate or overpriced housing (such as lack of urban jobs that pay living wages, the proclivity for single mothers to represent the highest percentage of the working poor, etc.).

Programs such as the Mons Valley Initiative are excellent examples of community collective approach to promoting solutions to housing and community needs problems. Locally, Habitat for Humanity and Atlanta Falcons' Warrick Dunn's programs that provide homes for eligible families to promote home ownership and community stability are stellar.

An overlapping problem with housing, however, is transportation. If people had access to Marta in the suburbs would help more take advantage of the voucher program and find and maintain jobs. Recall earlier this year the impact on the discontinuation of Clayton County's transit. The recession is surely making it worse for all, especially those who are marginal.

Social Security problems and solutions

While the intent of Social Security has been honorable since its inception, I am quite skeptical about whether government can - and should - continue to provide this program.

Back in the 1930s, the intention of Social Security was to keep the elderly, mostly widows, from living and dying homeless in the streets. With significant improvements since then in health care, Americans are living longer. It can no longer be a stop gap to sustain people; seniors are living decades beyond retirement.

I personally agree with former Treasury Secretary O'Neil's proposal: a birthright payment to each U.S. citizen at birth escrowed for their later life, inheritable by heirs should the individual not survive to receive it. I realize that this comes with two problems: one, illegals will flock to the U.S. to give birth in order to be eligible; two, this program will be beneficial for younger beneficiaries but not those older now.

The fact that it would be beneficial to the young is precisely why it should be done. A 50 year plan to transition from the current program to the new would help with the phase out. If we try to keep the current system it will be bankrupt eventually, despite the revisions to the plan resulting from the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. A gain in 12 years of solvency is merely a deference without real reform.

I am 52 years old and do not expect to benefit from Social Security. My parents' generation is nearly bankrupting the program. My great-grandmother lived to be 94, which was unusual for her generation. Now it is the norm for seniors to live into the 80s.

Obama's assertion that seniors should have the right to retire "with dignity" pulls at the public's emotions but does not erase the potential that government will raid the trust. It might be evident, but I do not trust government to optimally manager programs. As soon as there is an emergency somewhere else, they justify taking your money.

It is costing more and more, with fewer and fewer contributing workers, to sustain benefits currently. And that is without the first wave of Baby Boomers, the largest generation yet, starting to reach retirement age in 2011.

We have got to shift our focus from pouring money down a well to responsibly utilizing the money for the program. Raising taxes for businesses and private workers will not resolve it. Government cannot solve problems by taxing people to their eyeballs.

I will be very surprised if the program survives to reach its centennial.

Health Care

This is a most complex topic. While the published benefits of the Obama health plan are well received, I cannot for the life of me get past the fact that I do not believe that we can afford this plan. I think health care should be reformed but struggle with how. I think that lifting certain limitations will be beneficial but only for a while; after that, the system may collapse under the financial weight of the too many people using it.

I do, however, think that it is long overdue to reform health care. Insurers are known to limit coverage or deny coverage to those who need it most. Tiering cost based upon need (like auto insurance) seems to be fair but does little to help those with the greatest need, as medical expenses are astronomical compared with the cost of repairing a vehicle.

I invite my classsmates to offer real solutions to this issue; I am at a loss. There is a crossroad between what people need and what they can afford, and a chasm between making healthcare affordable and diminishing quality of care for quantity of those covered.

1. After reading the textbook, my view of who constitutes the poor is essentially the same, though I would add that the poor are those who are not able to maintain independence due to financial as well as psychological issues.
2. My view is also unchanged on this topic.
3. Globally, politics play a huge role in the creation of and potential to eliminate poverty. People become victims of the political machine and critical resources are usurped from the very people who need them the most. In some ways, though not as much, politics plays role in the U.S., as well. Resources tend to blow with political winds for and against the people most in need. Additionally, there are differing perspectives on who is poor and how they got that way and what it would take to help or resolve their issues. This naturally drives different schools of thought on resolution.
4. I don't think poverty is enough of a priority in the U.S. We seem as a nation to be more concerned with the plight of others in the world. The chronically poor are an invisible, voiceless, powerless entity in this country. The "haves" overall show little concern for the "have-nots."
5. I would suggest that the best way to permanently address poverty will take time (as with any genuine solution, rather than a patchwork temporary fix). In the U.S., we must address and resolve deficits in education and job skills prep so that people have the resources to engage mainstream in the free market society. Globally, the problem is not one so much of resource but access. That will require getting past the the monsters holding back resources in an effort to manipulate political power.

Cause and Effect

Chapters 5 and 6 provided a significant amount of insight, including reinforcing the lesson learned with our Budget Exercise. Namely, an under skilled, under educated person in the U.S. is consigned to the cycle of poverty. Our reading also showed the racial disparity experienced by minorities, as well social and familial factors, such as the significance of female headed households.

Social, racial and ethic stratification are like ankle shackles attached before a long race: you may still finish, might even have a long shot at winning, but know that you start out handicapped.

This reading focused on issues pertaining to poverty in America, including class, gender and even geographic distinctions in job opportunities. Still, though, these factors reflect relative poverty and quality of life issues that are so dramatically different than the abject survival mode poverty on the global front.

Initial questions, per syllabus

1. I think the poor are defined differently in the U.S. as opposed to globally. The poor in the United States I think are essentially the un- and undereducated and un- and underskilled who cannot get adequate employment to be self sufficient. Globally, especially in Third World countries, it seems as though the poor are people living in stark conditions that are exacerbated by natural and political constraints.

2. I think people are poor for a number of overlapping reasons: political, social, educational, prejudicial all are factors in the situational landscape of the poor. I think in the U.S. the poor are mostly comprised of the working poor; in other countries, adequate health care, housing, food, clean water - basic essentials to support life - are greater factors.

3. I am somewhat confused about what is being done to help alleviate poverty. Globally, poverty is exacerbated and even caused by political divides: division of food and other resources, access to clean water, etc., can be obstacles to establishing and maintaining adequate standards of living. In the U.S., living conditions vary dramatically from rural to urban environments. And, while local governments may attempt to ameliorate these conditions with problems, they don't really appear to solve problems. An analogy is how pharmaceuticals may allay illness symptoms, few actually solve the health issues, instead perpetuating dependence for whatever modicum of reduction in symptoms they provide. Government programs seem to have the same effect on poverty.

4. For this reason, I don't think that programs currently in place are truly effective. The relief they provide is cyclical in nature but thy do not provide resolution to issues. Lyndon Johnson's War in Poverty initiative of the 1960s did much to lift many from poverty, but two generations later many are so mired in dependence on failed government program, the war cannot be claimed to be a true victory.

5. There are two tiers of poverty, according to our text: serious hardships and critical hardships. Addressing critical hardships - those that threaten basic needs for survival, as defined in our textbook, are imperatives for all. Only when these are addressed, can serious hardships (those that impact quality of life) become priorities. We must find ways to unify across political, social and racial lines to make minimum standards of living an imperative for all. That is perhaps the intent of government entitlement programs. But this standard must be achieved in a manner that is uniformly applied and maintains the dignity of all involved.