And BT--as usual your cynicism exposes your lack of understanding of some of the important things in life. The world doesn't revolve around you and your crybaby attitude.
And BT--as usual your cynicism exposes your lack of understanding of some of the important things in life. The world doesn't revolve around you and your crybaby attitude.
The world revolves around no one. The world revolves because OF everyone! k?
And boomer.....please give us the reason why people are 'poor'. And what actually constitutes 'poor'? And please tell us how decades of government handouts and thousands of non-profits are not curing the problem.
Again I would invite you all to go to your local soup kitchen and listen to the stories of those who are there. You won't be at a loss for people. The soup kitchens are now feeding the "working" poor as well. Don't go down to the kitchen as a voyeur go there get something to eat and sit with folks. They only want a hand up. Many of you are quite cavalier in your response. Go down there and be present to those guests. Might help you make a more informed comment.
Yes boomer, there are those that do simply want a hand up and the opportunity to get back on their feet and will do whatever is needed to get there. However, there are also those who simply want the hand out and have no intention on doing anything about getting off welfare. Been to the food pantry, been to the soup kitchen, goodwill, salvation army, was a VITA volunteer tax preparer for low income families and work for State social services. Have been to unemployment as a recipient and have seen people ask for any job regardless of hours or pay. I have also seen people say they will only work certain days and only between certain hours. Not because of something important like needing dialysis or taking a class either. Simply because they didn't feel like doing anything more than the absolute bare minimum. There are many deserving welfare recipients, but there are also a lot of recipients who simply take their assistance and "drink it away".
I have read Boomer's comments and like them. If you need a definition of poor than you must be suffering from poor brain function. Of course there are those who will milk the system, that will never change. But what about all those who do want a hand up. I do not see anyone here offering that. The basic tenet of Catholicism, for those of you who worship in that faith, there is something called "God's preferential option for the poor." It is out of Liberation Theology but I embrace that tenet.
Wait a minute. When called on the carpet for supporting criminals you start speaking of soup kitchens??? I want to keep the criminals out. Why are soup kitchen individuals considered criminals? I'm sick of 75% of the crime in this town being committed by people who are not town residents. Shouldn't we be thinking of ways to correct the situation. If a family member of yours became a crime victim here in town (lets hope not) maybe your opinion might change on the subject.
City Will Stop Paying the Poor for Good Behavior By JULIE BOSMAN Published: March 30, 2010 An unusual and much-heralded program that gave poor families cash to encourage good behavior and self-sufficiency has so far had only modest effects on their lives and economic situation, according to an analysis the Bloomberg administration released on Tuesday.
The three-year-old pilot project, the first of its kind in the country, gave parents payments for things like going to the dentist ($100) or holding down a full-time job ($150 per month). Children were rewarded for attending school regularly ($25 to $50 per month) or passing a high school Regents exam ($600).
When the mayor announced the program, he said it would begin with private money and, if it worked, could be transformed into an ambitious permanent government program.
But city officials said Tuesday that there were no specific plans at this time to go forward with a publicly financed version of the program. In an announcement at BronxWorks, a nonprofit social services agency, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg pointed to a few examples of success: High school students who met basic proficiency standards before high school tended to increase their attendance, receive more class credits and perform better on standardized tests; more families went to the dentist for regular checkups.
But the elementary and middle school students who participated made no educational or attendance gains. Neither did high school students who performed below basic proficiency standards before high school.
“If you never fail, I can tell you, you’ve never tried new, innovative things,” Mr. Bloomberg said. “And I don’t know that this is a failure. I think it is, some things worked, and some things didn’t, and some things the jury’s still out on. And anything new you’re going to have that diversity of results.”
While payments to the families will end in August, researchers will continue to monitor them for three more years, to see if any behavior encouraged by the initial payments will continue. A final report will be issued in 2013.
The mayor has been applauded for his openness to innovative approaches to fighting poverty; one in five New York residents are poor.
But from the beginning, the program set off controversy. Conservative critics asked whether it was wise to pay people for simple behavior like going to parent-teacher conferences or doctor’s appointments; some liberals considered the approach condescending. The mayor, a believer in incentives in business and government, was determined to try it, but he avoided using public money initially.
The program was certainly expensive: Mr. Bloomberg and Linda I. Gibbs, the deputy mayor for health and human services, traveled to Mexico to learn more about Oportunidades, the welfare program there on which the New York City effort was based.
About $40 million in private donations, including from Mr. Bloomberg’s foundation, was collected to finance the effort, called Opportunity NYC Family Rewards. Two years into the program, more than $14 million had been paid out to 2,400 families. An additional $10.2 million is for operating costs, and $9.6 million for research and evaluation.
While most behavioral changes were not large, the cash provided to the families had a short-term effect: Those who participated earned, on average, more than $6,000 a year in the first two years. Largely as a result, those participating families were 16 percent less likely to live in poverty.
The families used the money to pay for basic living expenses, school supplies, electronic equipment and going to the movies, among other things.
More than 80 percent of the families were led by a single parent, 43 percent had three or more children and just over half of the parents held jobs. All lived in low-income areas in the Bronx, Brooklyn and Manhattan.
The program had a bumpy start, city officials and donors said. It was hard to recruit families from the beginning, said Margot Brandenburg, an associate director of the Rockefeller Foundation, the primary source of financing.
“I think people were confused, and there was some amount of distrust,” Ms. Brandenburg said. “For some people it sounded too good to be true. It took a while to explain to people what the offer was.” Ms. Gibbs said many families had been perplexed by the guidelines that were laid out for them. Cash payments were eventually eliminated for actions like getting a library card and follow-up visits with a doctor.
“Too many things, too many details, more to manage in the lives of burdened, busy households,” Ms. Gibbs said, standing next to the mayor on Tuesday. “Big lesson for the future? Got to make it a lot more simple.”
The city has been somewhat sensitive about the results of the program. Ms. Gibbs and other city officials cautioned that the report released on Tuesday reflected only initial results, and said that they were in line with other early results from similar conditional cash transfer programs in Latin America.
“There have never been these overnight, miraculous turnarounds,” Ms. Gibbs said. “These are programs that are working on deeply entrenched, long-term behaviors.”
One Brooklyn family who participated in the program said they collected more than $7,610 in two years. Janice Dudley and her 16-year-old daughter, Qua-neshia Darden, of East New York, said they received rewards for school attendance, good test scores and receiving regular medical checkups.
“It gives children the motivation to want to go to school because they know they’re going to get something back,” Ms. Dudley said, adding, “We might have a little problem next year when we don’t have money on the card.”
Mr. Bloomberg sounded philosophical on Tuesday as he spoke about the challenges that fighting poverty presents.
“You always hope that you’ll come across a magic silver bullet, and you never do,” he said. “If there were simple solutions, somebody would have found them a long time ago. And you make progress incrementally, particularly if you’re trying to focus on some of society’s biggest problems.”
there are many levels of our economic society. And I agree that there are some that have fallen into hard times and need a hand up. But there are some that with all the money in the world and all government programs can not rehabilitate. And that is a fact!!
Boomer, you are singing to the wrong choir here. Without giving out personal information, I have several family members and several friends that work in the social services dept.....at all levels. I also have family members and friends that are deeply involved, at all levels at major soup kitchens and non profits. Some in this county, some in this state and some from in other states.
They universally agree that the 'majority' are under educated, ill prepared for life, have low self-esteem, under achievers and all demonstrate no ambition. The only thing the government can provide for them, as for all people, is an education. The rest can not be cured with a government hand out program.
The system does not work!! It never has and it never will. The government system is not equipped to handle these human afflictions. They are 'personal afflictions' that money, soup kitchens, non profits or government programs can fix!
people will ALWAYS do what it takes to survive.....NO MATTER WHAT 'LEVEL'....I would kill you for the last apple on earth and you the same---FACT.... as for 'poor'----that would depend on what the definition and boundaries are.....I for one(lucky? or hard work?) fall outside of NYS family insurance... (this is okay with me)....I WORK HARD to not be there.......
I take care of folks that no one else can...(that's okay I CHOOSE IT)......however, if the Government deems that I am poor, YOU WILL NEVER, EVER be able to afford me......right now I 'work at will'.....anything else(government pension/benefits) is usury for the purchase of souls.....
nothing comes out in 'the wash' and it IS survival and choice......that's the beauty.....you want to donate time/money and resources of your own-- go ahead,,,,because---IT'S THAT PERSONAL........I've been there and do that......to 'legislate brotherly love' removes the spirit and soul of other human beings....it gives a false hope........JMHO......
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
POLICE BLOTTER ROTTERDAM POLICE DEPARTMENT Francis Mantello, 24, of Haswell Road, Watervliet, was charged March 31 with second-degree aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle, driving while intoxicated, blood alcohol content of .08 percent or higher and a violation. Sean Caines, 22, of Jefferson Street, Schenectady, was charged March 31 with petty larceny. Brian Eriksen, 43, of Helderberg Trail, Berne, was charged March 31 with third-degree criminal mischief. Danny Guerriero, 21, of Yates Village, Schenectady, was charged March 31 with petty larceny. Jemesha Hughes, 24, of Mc-Clyman Street, Schenectady, was charged March 31 with petty larceny. Nicholas Hanks, 23, of Hillcrest Village, Schenectady, was charged April 1 with petty larceny. Jennifier Bacon, 30, of University Place, Schenectady, was charged April 1 with second-degree criminal contempt. Danny Rivera, 27, of Smith Avenue, Amsterdam, was charged April 1 with petty larceny. Giovanna Vardine, 20, of Schermerhorn Street, was charged April 2 with petty larceny. Sean Giroux, 21, of Seneca Street, Troy, was charged April 2 with sexual misconduct. Amanda Held, 25, of Crane Street, Schenectady, was charged April 2 with third-degree aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle. Erikalynn Zadlo, 25, of Crane Street, Schenectady, was charged April 4 with third-degree aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle. Mahadeo Beharry, 36, of Summit Avenue, Schenectady, was charged April 5 with aggravated felony driving while intoxicated, first-degree aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle, felony driving while intoxicated and a violation. Athena Paturso, 19, of Trinity Avenue, was charged April 5 with third-degree aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle, operating a motor vehicle with a suspended registration and expired insurance, resisting arrest and disorderly conduct. Darren Robinson, 45, of Sprague Street, Schenectady, was charged April 5 with petty larceny. Edward Smith, 25, of Summit Avenue, Schenectady, was charged April 5 with third-degree bail jump and petty larceny. Ian Vivenzio, 38, of Lanehart Road, Altamont, was charged April 5 with second-degree aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle. Andrea Gorgen, 17, of Jockey Street, Charlton, was charged April 5 with petty larceny. Sansara Kilburn, 30, of Division Street, Ballston Spa, was charged April 5 with fourth-degree criminal possession of stolen property.
Logged
