New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has started a new pilot program which will reward poor residents for good behavior. In an effort to stop the ‘cycle of repeated setbacks’, Bloomberg has raised over $43 million in private money to fund this new program. Modeled after similar programs which have drawn praise for changing behavior of the poor in Brazil and Mexico, Bloomberg’s program would offer cash rewards for accomplishing fundamental tasks.
“Among the possible rewards in New York’s program are $25 for attending parent-teacher conferences, $25 per month for a child who maintains a 95 percent school attendance record, $400 for graduating high school, $100 for each family member who sees the dentist every six months and $150 a month for adults who work full time.”
The principles behind this program are noble, however I believe they could also outline the root causes of poverty. If minor cash rewards have the effect of changing the behavior of poor people in this program, allowing them to rise up out of poverty, the program will certainly be considered a success. At the same time, if the program is successful in it’s goal, it would certainly raise the doubts of many people if our current welfare system should be obsolete.
Many people I have spoken with feel the Welfare system and all programs which fall beneath it should not be considered “entitlements” which are owed, but privileges which are earned. If Bloomberg’s program is successful in NYC, I hope our Federal Government takes note of it and does away with entitlements, instead focusing on helping those who help themselves.
Unfortunately this would never happen, as most people in Government feel as Margy Waller does. Margy Waller is co-founder of Inclusion, a research and policy group in Washington and former domestic policy adviser in the Clinton administration. With regards to this program she feels “It just reinforces the impression that if everybody would just work hard enough and change their personal behavior we could solve poverty in this country, and that’s not reflected in the facts”
I am not exactly sure what “facts” Margy is referring to, but I do not see the harm in impressing upon people the benefits of hard work. After all, before the Government started taxing Peter to give handouts to Paul, everyone in our Country was required to work hard to succeed. Hard work is what made America what it is today.
Original article
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 45
Other than that, GET A JOB, live a lawful and just life, do the right things, live the right way, quit whining, get an education if you don't have one. Other than that, I got no sympathy for any piece of shit that wants a hand out....Hand up, yeah. Hand out, kiss my ass!
This entire country has gone from do for yourself to get the government to support you. JFK's speech on what we can do for our country would get blasted today.
Tis a sad state of affairs, indeed.
Its premise is that these people would do something for money that they wouldn't do just because they care about the family.
Many poor people work - sometimes completing a lot of overtime or two complete jobs.
The premise seems to be "you'd only care if we paid you to care".
Granted, a little extra cash is always a good thing when money is tight - I am just uncomfortable with the message it's sending to the people receiving the monetary impetus to act "middle class".
Welfare is there because we as a society decided that we didn't want to see kids go hungry or be homeless. The fact that it's their parents whose names are on the checks is what drives conservatives crazy. It is an undisputed fact that one can work full time and still qualify for food stamps and housing assistance.
That said (and remember here that I'm a liberal), I believe the welfare system is greatly flawed. It acts more like an enabler than an empowerer. Example: I was in college, trying to get an education so my family could get off welfare. They sent me a letter saying I had to be at a recertification appointment during my morining classtime hours. When I called to reschedule, they said I couldn't do so; the afternoon had to be kept open for people who didn't have appointments. Letting me work around my schedule would not have cost the government anything, and would be just as rewarding to my hard work as a cash outlay.
Instead of this program, why not give incentives to companies to pay a living wage, and penalize those who don't offer medical insurance or who outsource overseas? Why assume that because someone is poor, it's necessarily their own fault?
As with anything, there are abuses. But there are vast numbers of people whose proverbial bootstraps have simply disappeared by themselves. It is entirely possible to be a victim of circumstance. Too many wealthy people can't conceive of this because they were born into their money, or got a break, or got lucky, etc. It's true that many people have amassed their fortunes the honest way - but probably not the majority of wealthiest 1% in this country.
Except when those grabbing the loot are corporate whores. The right wing has NEVER seen a corporate welfare program they couldn't wet themselves over. How many wealthy politicians, particularly those who rail against social spending of any kind, regardless of whether or not their own economic policies have created a very real NEED for those programs, made their millions with public money, through corporate welfare programs? Most. Very few of these scummy pigs created their own wealth, and wouldn't be jack shit without the public trough.
Progressive don't like gimme programs anymore than "conservatives," but realize that programs to keep people from starving to death in the streets are necessary. What is NOT necessary is the revolting practice of corporate welfare that "conservatives" are 150% in favor of. Millionaires do NOT NEED government welfare programs. The poverty stricken do.
Which leads to the core issue. Poverty rises under voodoo economics. It happened during the 80's, was reversed during the 90's, and is happening once again now, and has been ever since voodoo economics was put back into action, destroying the middle class, shortly after the theft of the white house ion 12/12/2000.
As for Clark, what happened, your lithium run out again? Instead of railing against "Big Corporations...." the same ones employing millions, try investing in their stocks and reaping the rewards of successful American companies. Why bitch about high energy company profits when you can buy their stock and take part in some of that success?
Small minds reap small rewards, superior intellects use the tools before them and reap their share of the rewards. While a lot a goofballs were battering that evil software company Microsoft, I was buying their stock, who is the better for it financially?
If they're so "wonderful and wildly successful," they don't need my taxes as welfare handouts in order to succeed. Are you suggesting that, without artificially propping up capitalism with socialistic funding, there would be no functioning businesses in this country?
Btw, I'm not quite sure how you've managed to miss this one, but corporations have been shipping MILLIONS of US jobs overseas over the past several years, and the VAST majority of Americans are employed by SMALL BUSINESSES, NOT LARGE CORPORATIONS. You know, the small businesses that do NOT receive corporate welfare handouts.
What a shock to see that you're completely clueless on this issue, too.
And I also agree with Jeanine when she says
\\ Welfare is not an entitlement. Social Security is an entitlement. SocSec is there because workers paid into the program, as retirees, they're entitled to draw out of the system.
Welfare is there because we as a society decided that we didn't want to see kids go hungry or be homeless. The fact that it's their parents whose names are on the checks is what drives conservatives crazy. It is an undisputed fact that one can work full time and still qualify for food stamps and housing assistance.//
it's not that people are "entitled" to what you call "handouts," it's that during the Depression America woke up to the impact of a large and permanent underclass, and chose to do something about it.
Does some of this money go to undeserving people who waste it? Yes. But it is still worth the investment in order to keep families from starving.
Within the past year I went through a divorce and went from living on one income to not even making ends meet with one. I have no problems reaching out for assistance to make my life a little easier and the lives of my daughters a bit more comfortable. Money is alway a concern and I have a wonderful job and oddly enough my job is working with low income families and advocating for them and their preschool children.
To say that people living in poverty need to get a job is offensive to me. While I might not meet the qualifications of poverty set down by the federal government in numeric terms I'm one paycheck away from utter disaster all the time. It's no fault of mine. I have a college education and I have a job and I'm not "wasting" my money of frivolity. Yes, I understand what I'm talking about is situational vs. generational and that the two are very different but it's still poverty.
Wordzgurl, I work six shifts a week, and my co-worker who works five shifts has a second job. There is work out there, even in this "terrible" economy. If the economy is bad in your area, then move to where the jobs are. As for Clark's assertion about large corporations shipping jobs overseas, let's remember all of the foreign cars being built in the US. Those companies are outsourcing their jobs to us. It is all part of the global economy.
What this is, in a nutshell, is an orchestrated effort by the aristocratic ruling class, to eliminate the middle class, by making it more and more difficult to rise above poverty, and less and less likely for the middle class to be able to offer their children a higher level education.
Social engineering. Pure and simple. And, class warfare, of course. They want to eliminate the middle class entirely, and create two very different classes of people in this country; those who must work 2-3 jobs just in order to barely get by (remember when Bush smiled about that and called it a "uniquely American...great thing?"), and a very tiny percentage of whom never have to lift a finger to work.
The people that support these policies, even against their own best interests, have no difficulty in lavishing massive public funds to the corporate masters, of course, because that transfer of wealth from the middle class to the elite, will hasten the demise of the middle class, and thus democracy, which, of course, is the ultimate goal.
Look at everything that these people support, and you'll find virtually NOTHING that favors the middle class, and EVERYTHING that favors the plutocratic ruling elite. Social security? Gut it. Public education? Gut it. Public infrastructure? Give it to the plutocrats to profit from. Healthcare? Don't need any changes, because the rich can afford it no matter how costly it gets, and since it results in the killing and bankrupting of the poor and middle class, it's exactly the way they want it to be. Unions? They're evil and must be destroyed. ANY form of social spending whatsoever? Don't need it; gut them all. MASSIVE, ENDLESS corporate welfare programs? Lay it on, thick and heavy, baby! The more money (particularly DEBT money, since that debt is later transferred onto the backs of the middle class as higher taxes!) that can be shoveled to the plutocrats, especially when it deprives the poor and middle class, the better.
It's truly remarkable transparency of a truly wicked agenda, isn't it?
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8OKGR480&show_article=1
http://news.com.com/Study+400,000+IT+jobs+lost+since+2001/2100-
1022_3-5364627.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1554/is_n4_v21/ai_17833313
"Those companies are outsourcing their jobs to us."
This is not true. They have built production plants around the world, in order to shield their profits from fluctuations in currencies, and to save on distribution costs. They haven't "outsourced jobs to us" as some grand act of benevolence for the American economy.
"It is all part of the global economy."
Which, one might add, is destroying wages and unions in this country, and exploiting workers around the world, all to add profits to the corporate masters.
The premise that all you have to do is work hard and you too will enjoy the American dream is a lie, and a big one too. My father was a construction worker who typically worked 50 to 60 hours a week only to see his wages lag miserably behind the cost of living. I find it very telling that despite my dad working so many hours he barely recognized his own kids and that my mom worked forty hours a week as a mental health worker, we still qualified for food assistance. And that was in the sixties. It's not hard work that is need to end poverty, it will be when the selfish monetary gluttons of this country realize they need to be compensating those upon whose backs they owe they're success, fairly.
That's "uniquely American...that's great!"
One point I forgot to mention on this as well is that, these folks who advocate for massive welfare handouts to millionaires while gutting social spending and a fair minimum wage, are also the folks that wish to usher in the era where millionaire children can be handed their millionaire daddy's millions tax free, and can then invest that tax free cashola in dividend-producing stocks and add those profits to their piles of cash, tax free as well.
Thus, these "pull yourselves up by the bootstraps" advocates are bringing us to an era in which millionaire heirs not only do not have to lift a finger to work in their entire lives, but can do so tax free, and actually INCREASE THEIR WEALTH TAX FREE at the same time! All while the middle class is destroyed, minimum wages are eliminated, healthcare costs are exploded, debt in massively increased, government services are gutted, and, not coincidentally, poverty rises year after year. Welcome to the REAL effects of voodoo economics.
"Aristocratic ruling class"?
"Plutocrats"?
"Corporate masters"?
Ummm, Clark........this sounds really silly. Have you been talking to Ted Kennedy again?
This is class warfare nonsense. The reality is that the top 1% of wage earners in this country pay 36% of the taxes. The bottom 50% pay almost nothing..........and in many instances, truly nothing.
It is definitely time for true welfare reform! Stop giving my tax money to corporate profiteers; I'd be glad to see the same funds go to make individuals' lives a little better.
This isn't the first time I've pointed it out, but the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on my state's welfare program was done by a LAWYER who used dozens of fake ID's to scam the system for large quantities of money! But we'd rather penalize those who need the help because they might get an extra couple bucks they don't "deserve"!
Plus, it may have escaped you that Federal income taxes aren't the only kind we're obliged to pay! At least, they take a stab at being progressive; there are taxes that are extremely regressive. (Take another look at your Econ 101 book for the definitions of "progressive" and "regressive")
What I would like to see is a variety of changes. I'd like to see merit ensure a college education, for instance. This has been shown to work in several instances. If children know that if they work hard and do well they can indeed go to college, they have proven over and over again that they rise to the occasion. This is a wise expenditure of money since high school graduates make more money than drop outs, and college graduates make more than do high school only. If they make more, they contribute more to society through their taxes.
I am definitely with Clark about cutting off corporate welfare and handouts to huge agricultural conglomerates and oil companies.
With the poor you have to be aware that in many cases children are raised with virtually no parental supervision or guidance. The kids are left to sink or swim on their own, and even those who toe the like and work hard often don't make it out.
Another thing we need to realize is that not everyone is designed for college. There are lots of careers people fill that don't require it. We need ways of testing aptitudes and ensuring that these people who are not college bound are trained into some trade or other work skill while in high school. Why you ask? Because if they are trained for real jobs then they will make more money. If they make more money they pay more taxes and take from fewer social programs.
The path out of poverty and irresponsible behavior is probably not handing out money. It may be training and education, however. One study also shows that inmates in prison who enroll in and complete basic literacy studies are much more likely not to return to prison than those who don't.
The bottom line is that in the long run, training and education programs pay for themselves in terms of a better working class and people who can earn more. It does little to yell "get a job" if the person has no skills, no training, and has no idea how to even apply for a job much less get and keep one. A hand up is often much more productive than a hand out.
But seriously, the main focus here should be that not all of our poor are without jobs or lazy as some have implied. To me the root cause of poverty may very well be education. A high school drop out will have a difficult time feeding a family of 4 in todays economy, while a person with a degree can live fairly comfortable.
First of all the funds were from private monies, not from our taxes. Second, when you give incentatives such as $100.00 to reward going to the dentist, you might very well prevent a child or an adult from ending up at the County hospital with an abcess, where your tax dollars are used to pay for their care.
To give the children an incentative for attendence only makes sense as it could be the difference between the drop out and the graduate...one of them being on our welfare rolls, the other not.
To subsidize them for working full time can only benefit you the taxpayer. It keeps them employed and paying taxes.
To suggest that these private monies are entitlements is ludicrous. Investing in Americans is always worth any effort we put forth!
"Plutocrats"?
"Corporate masters"?
Ummm, Clark........this sounds really silly. Have you been talking to Ted Kennedy again? "
ar·is·toc·ra·cy /ˌærəˈstɒkrəsi/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ar-uh-stok-ruh-see] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -cies.
1. a class of persons holding exceptional rank and privileges, esp. the hereditary nobility.
2. a government or state ruled by an aristocracy, elite, or privileged upper class.
3. government by those considered to be the best or most able people in the state.
4. a governing body composed of those considered to be the best or most able people in the state.
5. any class or group considered to be superior, as through education, ability, wealth, or social prestige.
plu·toc·ra·cy /pluˈtɒkrəsi/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ploo-tok-ruh-see] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -cies.
1. the rule or power of wealth or of the wealthy.
2. a government or state in which the wealthy class rules.
3. a class or group ruling, or exercising power or influence, by virtue of its wealth.
http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Corporatocracy
Corporatocracy (sometimes corporocracy) is a neologism coined by proponents of the Global Justice Movement to describe a government bowing to pressure from corporate entities.
Yeah, I guess you're right...how silly of me to suggest it.
Regards,
Doyle I <~~~~~
Here is me, pointing out as others did that this program is funded by private money not government money.
Frankly, it's nice to see that some corporate money holders are taking on a project for the benefit of the public's welfare; even if the money raised doesn't equal even one percent of their combined net worths.
But what they offer is interesting.
For a two income household with two school age children the rewards listed would add up to $5150 per year. A helpful amount but not enough to make a gravy train.
$150 - $25 every two months for parent teacher conferences
$600 - $25 per child per month for perfect attendance
$800 - $100 per family member per bi-annual dentist visit
$3600 - $150 per month per full-time working parent
-------
$5150 per year
Enough money to actually help a struggling family (even one in NYC), but nowhere near enough for a phat life.
With $43 million they could help some 8,300 families.
Oh, but wait, I'll bet there will be administrative costs and set-up time. Offices will have to rented, staff will have to be hired, equipment and utilities, licenses and insurance, advertising and brochures, a web site. It will probably take a year to get all that arranged and functioning.
So, after all that, and setting aside a prudent reserve they may end up with $4.3 million to put toward aid. That's cool; that's 830 families that could be helped; providing they pass all the interview requirements.
Oh, but that's not how things work. The $4.3 million will be put in an investment account that will be expected to yield $430,000 per year. Most of that will be used to pay benefits; enough to help 83 families.
As for rewarding people for doing the right things, of course we should.
Our society is already rigged to reward people that do wrong things. "Success by any means" is one of our prominent national mottos; and the source of many of our national woes.
If we want a better country, we should do everything we can to encourage people to do the right things; especially if that means sharing the wealth with them.
Money can be a grease in today's societal wheels, but American society has evolved to the point where money is the sustenance which no citizen can live without.
Thanks for cut & pasting the dictionary.....lol.
It looks like you've been cruising your normal Daily Kos and/or Media Matters for the latest in Leftist supermarket tabloid gossip.
The root cause of poverty isn't necessarily being without - its not knowing how to handle the money you do have.
The problem is the poor have none to handle, manage or mismanage...mainly due to a lack of EDUCATION! How hard can that be to understand? It is impossible to mishandle what you do not have!
Anyone with one eye and half a butt can figure that out, unless your allowing the greed and corruption in the White House to cloud your mind!
The vast majority of rich in this country did not start out that way. Sure, there are a few Paris Hilton's here and there, but for the most part, they're an anomaly. Most rich people were poor people once. And since those folks probably came out of the womb screaming, naked, and broke, just like you and I did, they probably handled their money differently than most Americans to achieve their wealth. These stupid stereotypes of the rich being born that way is the most idiotic thing I've ever heard...........and it pushes the BS of class warfare.
Do you understand that this is America, and you can achieve amazing results here after starting life with absolutely nothing? Stop loathing the rich, and start becoming one. Follow what they do and emulate their methods. Don't just curse them and remain broke.
The root cause of being poor is lack of financial education, but its also handling the little money you have, badly.
I have no problem at all with Capitalism. Why do you?
For some growing up in this world is a struggle....growing up with perhaps one parent, no child support possibly no support at all. They drop out of school because no one cares if they go or not. These kids find it all too easy to get involved with the wrong crowd. After all they have grown up with no values, no morals...no love. They just grew up on their own! They don't have enough self respect to even know that they can achieve a better life. It's not easy to overcome the issues they struggle with. Yes, some do go back and get a GED...but it isn't enough to get them out of what is classified as the working poor in our country.
You see Bret...it isn't always about people who mismanaged their money, sometimes it's about kids who were mismanaged! And yes I understand this is America and you can achieve amazing things here, but I also realize the limitations as well! Go check out an inner city classroom!
I'll agree with you on something for a change...........there will always be poor people.
In this country, and in very few others, the opportunity to go from street person to the Trump Towers is the most possible. How is this possible here and almost nowhere else? The form of government we have, that's how.
The predecessor forms of capitalism that we now think are outmoded, had to happen to allow us to proceed to where we are now. I'm glad most happened, saddened that some of the less-equitable happened. However, from both good and bad, we have our current system, which I like (and have profited from very nicely).
So you ask, which one am I choosing? Geoffrey, it isn't about me. All of America chose this one, I just go by the rules and do very well that way.
True, but is that a bad thing or a good thing?
Is it good that some are making tons of money, and some aren't?
Capitalism is just the framework - an empty vessel. You do with it as you please (bearing in mind that there are certain standards you have to adhere to........laws, etc.). Some do well, others don't. Personally, I like the fact that I can mold certain aspects of Capitalism to my liking. Try doing that in almost any other form of government.............you can't!
We just have to respect that there is the poor among us and sometimes it really is through no fault of their own..in fact it is often generational.
"Now just how much moderation do you support? Universal education? Universal health care? Universal retirement systems? Wage standards? Vacation standards?
You see, we both support capitalism; where we differ is how to moderate it."
I'm for a small, weak Federal government, and fairly strong State governments..........the ideal among traditional Conservatives, going back to the Founding Fathers.
Universal education? Depends. How far do you want this to go?
Universal healthcare? No.
Universal retirement systems? No.
Wage standards? Like what? Minimum wage laws or something else?
Vacation standards? Explain please.
Just like the idea of Marxism, it all sounds good on paper. Implementation is where things really go to hell quickly.
I like the ideal of traditional Capitalism.
You seem to like a Capitalism/Socialism mix.
I do not find our economic system, as it stands today, to be ideal. In fact, the type of Capitalism I like does not promise either universal healthcare or universal education. I question why the government is so deeply involved in either..........and I want the Federal government involvement to diminish. If the Federal government had a slight regulatory component (as opposed to the Cabinet level oversight and regulation it has today) to either health care or education, it would be a vast improvement over the fiasco the Federal government has turned both into, in the past 230+ years.
I don't want the Federal government involved in vacation "laws". That is a business-to-employee negotiation. If the Federal government ever gets involved, I'm hopeful that its just to regulate minimum standards.
As a Conservative Capitalist, I want government out of almost everything. I understand how GM, Chrysler and Ford want the government to take the healthcare millwheel from around their necks...........its a loser for them!
The governments that you mentioned do not have the best quality healthcare programs that you seem to want. That's why most of Europe and Canada come HERE for healthcare. Their systems take care of the most basic needs, but almost nothing else. Not at all what I desire.
Canadians are not that happy with their health care - I used to live in Vancouver, BC. It isn't that great. Basic, yes - good, not really.
I have a good, company provided health care policy that I negotiated with my employer before I came to work for them. I think everyone should do the same with their employer.