Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 02-10-2009, 06:36 PM
 
Location: TX
174 posts, read 638,275 times
Reputation: 81

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenband View Post
Question: how can we prevent the scenario that njohnson describes? I don't see a way to exclude the "undesirable poor" without also pricing out the working poor. But if we put all poor folks in the same place, the worst will generally drag everyone down.

Also, what would folks like to see happen to those who are unwilling to work? Starvation? Is it even possible to give help to those who need it, without also giving aid to those who don't deserve it? What policies can CT enact, as a state, to bring that about?

I guess I just always wonder where we expect the indigent poor to go, and what we expect them to do. If we were (for instance) to expel all the poor folks from Hartford, whether through force or through gentrification, where would -- where should -- they go?

So how does CT deal with these problems, in a way that doesn't screw over the honest poor? The only truthful answer is that I have no idea, but I'm hopeful that we're on the cusp of a new era of frugality and optimism. We'll see.
I think those are excellent arguments, goldenband, thank you.

This has obviously become more of a discussion about poverty than about New Britain itself.

For those of you who keep talking about how these people deserve this and these other people don't deserve anything because they don't try hard enough, what exactly gives you the right to determine who deserves what? Have you met every single man, woman, and child who lives in New Britain (or anywhere else)? How then can you pass judgment on whether they are trying hard enough with all of these "opportunities" they supposedly have right in front of them?

Does the person who is hired out of 100 applicants for 1 position at McDonald's deserve more than the 99 other people who weren't hired? Or the person who has no access to reliable transportation, do they deserve to walk miles to get to work?

None of us are qualified to determine what a person deserves or doesn't deserve. State and federal programs don't give based on who has the most ambition or ability, they give based on need, and need is usually determined by income, not personality.

 
Old 02-10-2009, 06:42 PM
 
Location: Storrs, CT
722 posts, read 1,975,575 times
Reputation: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by heather121 View Post
I think those are excellent arguments, goldenband, thank you.

This has obviously become more of a discussion about poverty than about New Britain itself.

For those of you who keep talking about how these people deserve this and these other people don't deserve anything because they don't try hard enough, what exactly gives you the right to determine who deserves what? Have you met every single man, woman, and child who lives in New Britain (or anywhere else)? How then can you pass judgment on whether they are trying hard enough with all of these "opportunities" they supposedly have right in front of them?

Does the person who is hired out of 100 applicants for 1 position at McDonald's deserve more than the 99 other people who weren't hired? Or the person who has no access to reliable transportation, do they deserve to walk miles to get to work?

None of us are qualified to determine what a person deserves or doesn't deserve. State and federal programs don't give based on who has the most ambition or ability, they give based on need, and need is usually determined by income, not personality.

You deserve a kiss, muah!
(YES! someone might be listening to me!)
 
Old 02-10-2009, 07:50 PM
 
92,361 posts, read 122,631,745 times
Reputation: 18179
As a person that has been reading the posts on here, I find it interesting how people automatically think that poor people are the only one's receiving assistance when there are many people that aren't poor get assistance. Think about corporate welfare, a serious issue that came to light in a big way recently. States give these companies all of these tax breaks to stay and then they leave when they feel like it. Guess who misses out in the end? I'm not even going to get into other forms of assistance like loans and the like that people don't think of as assistance, but in all honesty it is.

Yes, there is something called the working poor. There are many jobs where people don't make enough to keep up with the cost of living for their families due to things like the breakdown of the family due to various reasons, the pay per hour, the loss of many manufacturing jobs and so on. So, people take what they can get and they still are skimping to get by.

Then, you the issue of people leaving their neighborhoods or "flight". I find this interesting because a lot of flight occurs due to superficial reasons like a certain ethnic group is moving in and this is in spite of the upkeep of the neighborhood in many cases. So, an economic base changes due to the reality of economics in this country in regards to race and ethnicity. Then, a stigma gets attached, even if the community is still is good shape. Go to some of the other state forums to see what I'm talking about.

I also want to address the immigrant thing. People have to keep in minds that many immigrants that come here are highly established in the their countries of origin. It's like the Asian model minority thing, but ironically African immigrants are the most highly educated immigrant group in this country, but you would never heard that anywhere. People never get into the issues with poverty that Southeast Asians have and the variation within other racial/ethnic groups as well. History also plays a big part in that due to the variation in "struggle", that people try to compare, but really have to put that into proper perspective.
 
Old 02-10-2009, 09:26 PM
 
8,777 posts, read 19,790,069 times
Reputation: 5290
Quote:
Originally Posted by brasscitybluenwhite View Post

-Poverty rate among disabled males: 18.4%
-Disabled rate among poor males: 31%
-Poverty rate among disabled females: 19%
-Disability rate among poor females: 28%

(By this information, we can conclude that out of the approx. 9200 people that live in poverty in New Britain, we can conclude that there is a very large percentage that are disabled)

-48 percent of New Britain's poor do not work. This includes the number of disabled persons.
There's a big, big, difference between being "handicapped" and being "disabled". Disabled is really a catch-all term these days that can be used to describe people with dependency "issues", amongst other things. What types of "disabilities" are they referencing in those numbers that you've posted, Brass?
 
Old 02-10-2009, 10:05 PM
 
Location: Storrs, CT
722 posts, read 1,975,575 times
Reputation: 231
It doesn't say, but I assume that they have some sort of disability where they are unable to work. (All of the people that I know that are on Section 8 are disabled. My best friend's mother has fibromyalgia, where she could technically work during the day, but it would give her pain at night) She got approved for section 8, but not SSI.)

Besides that, it doesn't say anything about the type of disability.
 
Old 02-10-2009, 10:43 PM
 
8,777 posts, read 19,790,069 times
Reputation: 5290
Quote:
Originally Posted by brasscitybluenwhite View Post
It doesn't say, but I assume that they have some sort of disability where they are unable to work. (All of the people that I know that are on Section 8 are disabled. My best friend's mother has fibromyalgia.
You've proven my point right there. Fibromyalgia is definitely a "catch-all" thing like i alluded to earlier.

......."No biological tests exist to diagnose fibromyalgia, and the condition cannot be linked to any environmental or biological causes.......
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/14/he...pain.html?_r=1
 
Old 02-11-2009, 07:34 AM
 
Location: Storrs, CT
722 posts, read 1,975,575 times
Reputation: 231
This happens with all new illnesses. It happened with Depression also.

In the U.S., we give final say to the FDA on whether a drug is indicated for the right illness. Lyrica targets nerve pain, and whether or not the person has "fibromyalgia", the person must have nerve pain, as the FDA says that this is an approved drug for that illness.

Individuals who have this type of "nerve pain" are considered to have fibromyalgia. Maybe it should be called something else, but every night my friends mother goes into this deep pain state where she needs to take drugs in order to go to sleep.

This also is happening with "Lyme Disease", and whether or not people have that also.
 
Old 02-11-2009, 08:21 AM
 
Location: New England
8,155 posts, read 20,946,461 times
Reputation: 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by brasscitybluenwhite View Post
J...
Apparently, you all belief that the poor "infect" cities like rats and roaches. But since you all do not have a problem with picking on the poor, you might as well take a look at some facts.
I understand what you mean by the terminology and while it's not what I would use towards the PEOPLE, I think a case can be made using the term "infection" towards the "ills". It's much like a virus such as the flu or a cold. It's inhibiting the ability of folks to live a productive life, but it's also a curable problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brasscitybluenwhite View Post
Disclaimer-These facts are not intended to persuade anyone that the poor in New Britain, CT "choose" to be poor.

-87% of the residents in New Britain, CT are renters

-Poverty rate among disabled males: 18.4%
-Disabled rate among poor males: 31%
-Poverty rate among disabled females: 19%
-Disability rate among poor females: 28%

(By this information, we can conclude that out of the approx. 9200 people that live in poverty in New Britain, we can conclude that there is a very large percentage that are disabled)
Do we have to define "poor" for a third time?

What you call poor, a person in 75% of the world would call "rich". Just something to think about.

The disabled thing is also another large scam going on. What constitutes disabled? It's the most B.S. designation given these days.

"I have ADD so I'm disabled - give me state aid".

"I'm 480lbs and can't walk across the parking lot so I'm disabled - give me a sticker and state aid."

Being HANDICAPPED is the real issue. If someone is incapacitated because of mental illness or a physical problem - of course we as a compassionate society should provide for them. No question.

So I take your stats with a very small grain of salt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brasscitybluenwhite View Post
-48 percent of New Britain's poor do not work.
So let me get this straight. 48% of the "poor" don't work.


"Poor" - "don't work" "poor" - "don't work"

You really don't see the correlation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by brasscitybluenwhite View Post
-74% of those who live in New Britain have a parent that is a single mother.
(Imagine raising multiple children by yourself? You probably would need state help right? I know this is gonna catch a lot of "well thats not my problem", but so be it. It is what it is.)
So because I was the responsible one, didn't have 6 kids with 3 different women and then say "let the state take care of it" it's my fault?

It's my problem?

I'm a very compassionate person. Anyone who has been on these forums for any time has seen the time and money I put towards charity and those really in need.

But I can not, will not support paying people off to live irresponsible lifestyles.

You screwed up your life? You want state aid? Bring back the work camps.

Sorry, but if you are holding your hand out for state aid, you should also know that you WILL BE expected to work.

Making hard working responsible people pay for irresponsible non working people to stay home and raise their kids is wrong. Period.

Quote:
Originally Posted by njohnson View Post
In all three cases the street has been slowly transformed. The residents in these properties don't take care of their lawns, have dilapidated exteriors on their homes, have garbage that sits in their yard, broken down cars that sit in the road, and annoy the neighbors with cars with loud exhausts and stereos as well as dirt bikes they drive around the neighborhood. In one case when I stop by I try to figure out how many people live there as there are 6 cars always at a single house.

You may say they are minding their business or are allowed to do what they want with their property but what is happening is they are killing the neighborhood from the inside out. No one wants to live next to someone like that and when homes for sale have open houses it becomes a red flag. Now property values are forced to drop because a few are killing the neighborhood. Next what happens is that with property values dropping more lower income people move into the neighborhood duplicating the problem until eventually the entire neighborhood is killed and middle class people who are house hunting don't want to move there. What ends up happening is the only people left are the old timers who refuse to move until they die or go to a nursing home. You can usually spot these homes because they are in better condition than the ones around them and may have an American flag on the doorstep
Exactly. I happens more than you know. East Hartford has a lot of this going on. I was recently in the Leverich Dr area of E Hartford and this type of problem was painfully obvious.

I will point out at the same time that my customer on Leverich drive used to live in Hartford, is a single mother, black and lives in a nice home that is well kept.

She owns and runs a very popular "salon" in Hartford, has several rental properties take care of for her and is the model for the very thing we are talking about.

How did/does "she" do it? Hmmm.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brasscitybluenwhite View Post
One day, I was at McDonalds with my friends and I told you i was hungry and I couldn't cook. You gave $5 dollars to me, without even looking at my friends. Wrong thing to do. If you really wanted to help us, then you would still teach us how to cook. But you don't know me from **** so to you it probably seemed like the right thing to do. You can even get to go home and tell your wife that you did a good deed today. Now look, theres even more hungry kids at McDonalds the next day. And guess what they want?
Exactly! Your getting it! Handouts don't work! Hey now!

A Mexican guy who works for me (legal citizen and very good family man) says it simply and best.

Ask him why he works so hard? His answer: "Hey ah, no work, no eat. You understand?"

Wow...he gets it. Work hard or don't eat. And believe me, he makes good money because of it.

He lives in a very modest apartment her in Manchester and puts most of his resources into his children. Send them to a private catholic school etc. Basically, he sacrfices himself so his children will have a better life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brasscitybluenwhite View Post
The government has to realize that instead of taking money out of the hood (headstart, after school programs, republicans, 2006, remember?), they should be trying to put more money into the hood with better oversight. Because as long as theres a McDonalds, there gonna be hungry kids standing outside, waiting for someone to give them fries or to teach them how to cook.
B.S. It's not the governments responsibility. Why can't you understand that?

You really really should spend some time with a lot of Mexicans. Hungry Mexicans.

You ask them if they know how to do "x" work and the answer is "yes, no problem - whatever you need I can do. When do I start".

Period.

Why is that? Think about it the difference between them and that mindset and the culture that stands there with their hand out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brasscitybluenwhite View Post
By the way, according to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Section 8 provides 50% assistance to those who apply. There is usually "a long waiting list" and many cities eventually "close the sign up list". The program is available for the elderly, the disabled, and very poor people. Applicants may not exceed 30% of the area's income. Preference is given to the homeless, those that can prove that they pay 50% of their income for rent, and those who are involuntarily displaced.
That is not accurate. Not at all.

My brother has a "step daughter" living in his downstairs apartment (and hates how she abuses the system as she lives better than he - believe it.) getting $850.00 of $1000.00 per month rent paid for. (He remarried at a very later age and kind of inherited a grown woman with a child from his current wife)

Care to clear that up?

From the state of CT DSS Website:
Eligibility for a housing voucher is determined based on the household's annual gross income and the PHA's definition of a family. Participation is limited to U.S. citizens and specified categories of non-citizens who have eligible immigration status. In general, the family's income may not exceed 50% of the median income for the county or metropolitan area in which the family chooses to live.
Hmm, so lets see in Manchester that's about 30k per year but also doesn't include noncash benefits such as free healthy care, food allowance, utility assistance, or heat assistance.

To see how this pans out, go back to page 3 and reread my post.

It's wrong. Just flat out wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brasscitybluenwhite View Post
And that link you provided is garbage.
That link was to the State of CT DSS website showing the actual DSS budget. Argue with them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenband View Post
Question: how can we prevent the scenario that njohnson describes? I don't see a way to exclude the "undesirable poor" without also pricing out the working poor. But if we put all poor folks in the same place, the worst will generally drag everyone down.
True.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenband View Post
Also, what would folks like to see happen to those who are unwilling to work? Starvation?
This may sound cruel, but desperation and hunger ARE powerful motivators.

Why do you think there are millions of Mexicans risking their lives to come here and most do work very hard?

The "poor" in our country live in no where NEAR the despiration of other countries around the world.

There was a time that welfare programs put you to work. It was a last resort, and people did what they had to do to get off of it.

Where has our "hunger" gone?

Quote:
I guess I just always wonder where we expect the indigent poor to go, and what we expect them to do. If we were (for instance) to expel all the poor folks from Hartford, whether through force or through gentrification, where would -- where should -- they go?
I don't think "uprooting" is the answer. An ultimatum would be nice.

Work, or get nothing. Hmm. I bet most will work or move. I'd almost guarantee it.

In fact when NY tightened their welfare laws harshly, and we in CT had not done so yet, there was a mass influx to our cities of NYer looking for "welfare" refuge.

This was in the early-mid 90's

Quote:
I also think that we massively underestimate the permanent disadvantage that people have when they grow up in severe poverty. It's one thing to say "Everyone can always pull themselves up by their bootstraps", but it's a different story when you're talking about someone who grew up with mild brain damage from malnourishment, lead paint, and/or beatings from your parents.
Not everyone in severe poverty eats lead paint, is malnourished, beaten, or has brain damage. Come on.

I gew up on Ward Street in Waterbury and Transit Street (Dead set ghetto) and I can at least tell you in my experience, there was the odd person in said scenario but the vast majority of us were just fine.

It's the exception and not the rule.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenband View Post
Even if things aren't that extreme, there's absolutely no substitute for the opportunities -- for love, for learning, for growth -- that are missed in those first eighteen years. It's something that's easy to take for granted if you had it.
No one is against those things. I don't buy into people are "kids" until they are 18. "Teenagers" is a modern invention.

How do you suppose the "teenagers" who were living as adults back in the 19th century managed to do it?

How about the "young" in the early 20th century that plucked chickens or did what they had to do to make sure their kids didn't have too in their future?

Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenband View Post
JViello, too, I would invite you to remember that there was a time that you wouldn't have been hired for most jobs, because of your Italian background.
Right. For sure. But my people also did what they had to do IN SPITE of the racism. Same for the Irish. They never looked for the state to bail them out.

Look at the results.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenband View Post
Your story is a brave and admirable one, but its happy ending would have been a lot harder to come by, 100 years ago -- a lot of doors would've been slammed in your face, literally or figuratively.
I agree. But you know what? It would not have stopped me from going forward. I told you, I'm too dumb to fail. Extremely thick headed, and bullwark like in my determination. I guess I learned it from my Great Grandfather. 80+ years old, still working hard building stone walls. Worked two jobs his entire life to get his family in a better place.

Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenband View Post
That's basically a non-issue for Italians now, but there are still a lot of people who wouldn't hire a black person, or someone with a name that connoted "ghetto-ness" to the reader. It may not be legal, but the resumé still goes in the trash, unread. Equal opportunity is a great ideal, but I don't think it's here yet in reality. How would any of us react if we knew we'd been denied an opportunity because of our race? Would we stay noble, or would we start to get embittered and, maybe, be tempted to stop playing by the rules? I don't know.
Oh oh oh, I have to stop you right three.

'Ghettoness" is NOT the same as having a certain ethnic background or skin color.

Discriminating against someone because they are black is wrong. Dead wrong. The person can not change their skin color - nor should have too.

BUT "ghettoness" is a lifestyle CHOICE.

If someone does not wish to hire someone because they can't speak proper English (And I don't mean a spanish accent), use certain terminology or dress and portray themselves a certain way...that is NOT descrimination.

I had a young man who works for a hotel I service apply for a job at my company. I know him from seeing him work at the hotel.

I told him flat out. I can not have the "gangster speech" or the "look" in my company. It's just our standards as we go into people's homes etc and I do not wish to have my company represented that way.

If he was willing to put that stuff aside, I'd hire him on. He said no, so he didn't get hired.

Call me an ass, what can I say. I didn't discriminate because of his skin color...far far far from it as there was a black guy who is my right hand man sitting next to me in the interview!

Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenband View Post
So how does CT deal with these problems, in a way that doesn't screw over the honest poor? The only truthful answer is that I have no idea, but I'm hopeful that we're on the cusp of a new era of frugality and optimism. We'll see.
I admire and respect your mindset and share most of your goals to some degree. The problem I think we face is we differ in our ways to solve it.

That is the hurdle I'm not sure how to overcome.

Quote:
Originally Posted by heather121 View Post
For those of you who keep talking about how these people deserve this and these other people don't deserve anything because they don't try hard enough,
Let me put it this way.

NO ONE DESERVES ANYTHING but equal opportunity.

Get that?

That's your constitution. That's the country you live in.

The only exception for me is the handicapped and elderly.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ckhthankgod View Post
As a person that has been reading the posts on here, I find it interesting how people automatically think that poor people are the only one's receiving assistance when there are many people that aren't poor get assistance. Think about corporate welfare, a serious issue that came to light in a big way recently. States give these companies all of these tax breaks to stay and then they leave when they feel like it.
#1 I am SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO against ANY bailout. So yes, "corporate welfare" is just as bad IMO.

I will only purchase a Ford product now as they are the only ones who said "no" to the fed handout.

#2 Your definition of corporate welfare is flat out wrong. It's not tax abatement. See, you attract a company to your state by giving them a tax break. Guess what they do when they get here? Hire people. Yes, that's right, now people are WORKING and PAYING TAXES, and BUYING local services which generates SALES TAX and create more local jobs that generates more TAX REVENUE.

Get it?

They can't leave whenever they want BTW. No state will give a tax break without a contractual agreement of timeframe. It just doesn't happen and no company is going to go through the expense of relocation and plant roots and just "up and leave" unless it's really severe. It is a nightmare to relocate a company. Trust me.

Anyway, I'm one man swiming upstream. Most of the attitude portrayed are the reason we are headed towards a socialist society. I know I'm in the minority, and well...it is what it is.

I'm hoping to educate folks a little bit that the state is NOT your answer and that you will live happier, more free and produtive lives by making your own way and making your own future. The state purse has a LOT of strings attached...be careful what you wish for.

We are repeating nothing more than bread and circus.
... Already long ago, from when we sold our vote to no man,
the People have abdicated our duties; for the People who once upon a time
handed out military command, high civil office, legions — everything, now
restrains itself and anxiously hopes for just two things:

Bread and circuses.
Juvenal, Satire (Roman poet)
Have a read if you want to know more about the path we are heading down:

Lessons from History by William Neidinger: HURRICANE KATRINA, PROFESSOR TYLER, AND BREAD AND CIRCUSES: PART I
 
Old 02-11-2009, 08:24 AM
 
Location: New England
8,155 posts, read 20,946,461 times
Reputation: 3338
Quote:
Originally Posted by brasscitybluenwhite View Post
This also is happening with "Lyme Disease", and whether or not people have that also.
Sweeet! I'm disabled, as I have Lyme! Woohoo!

Give me my sticker and all you b*tches can watch me get the front parking spot as this 5'11" 190lb well built healthy individual walks from the handi spot carrying my son along.

Lyme gets cured with a course of antiboitics. Good grief.
 
Old 02-11-2009, 08:36 AM
 
Location: Connecticut
34,751 posts, read 56,566,226 times
Reputation: 11173
Quote:
Originally Posted by JViello View Post
Lyme gets cured with a course of antiboitics. Good grief.
Actuallt that is not true. It is treatable if caught early enough but it is not cured. Jay
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top