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.
Anyone watch this Frontline show on PBS with Bill Moyers who followed two middle class families in Milwaukee from the 1990s to today? They lost their jobs at a manufacturing plant in the early 1990s, and since that time they have worked jobs that barely paid $9 an hour.
Anyone watch this Frontline show on PBS with Bill Moyers who followed two middle class families in Milwaukee from the 1990s to today? They lost their jobs at a manufacturing plant in the early 1990s, and since that time they have worked jobs that barely paid $9 an hour.
Only saw the end, most except for the preacher had lost their homes. Milwaukee looks like it has been decimated.
What options did these two families have besides staying in Milwaukee and taking $9 an hour jobs for a lifetime, with no wage increases?
(1) Leave Milwaukee. This may not have been possible if they couldn't sell their homes. One of them lost the home to foreclosure anyway at the age of 49. I think it was her 2nd foreclosure.
(2) Go to college and get a degree and apply for white collar jobs. The first high school graduate and then only college graduate in the black family makes $45K as a city government employee at the age of 35. He is single, never married, no kids. The other son joined the Navy and is currently working as a contractor in Afghanistan.
(3) Open their own businesses. The kids were self employed as videographers, mechanics, and lawn care providers. They weren't making any money at these businesses.
(4) Rely on credit. They were using credit cards at 24% interest to pay college tuition.
(5) Rely on government assistance. A couple of the adult kids of the two families were on government assistance, food stamps, etc. Unlike their parents, they were not married when they had kids. They were also living with other family members.
Any other options?
I am not placing blame on these families. The white family was younger than the black family. They certainly were told in high school to get a college degree in the 1990s. That still may not have helped them, though.
I think they assumed some risk either not completing high school or not furthering their educations or skills and depending completely on the one manufacturing company for a lifetime job. They had a culture of "jobs" compared to "careers." The 49-year-old white woman probably could have received a BA and become a registered nurse instead of the $11 an hour job she trained for as a healthcare aid.
Not to bring race into it, but the black couple didn't even have high school diplomas, and they and their children are better off today than the white family who had high school diplomas.
How?
(1) The black couple is still married. The white couple divorced.
(2) The black couple has at least one child with a college degree who is employed as a policy writer with the city government. And they have another son with Naval experience working as a defense contractor, probably has security clearances.
(3) The black couple has at least one spouse employed. The husband is 60-years-old and works for the city government Department of Sanitation making $26K a year. I am curious how he is more qualified for that job than one of the younger white sons from the other family. Are the whites discriminated against in hiring for city government jobs or are they not applying for those jobs?
Last edited by hot_in_dc; 07-10-2013 at 07:06 AM..
Cognitive dissonance, anyone? This is what Reaganism and Romneyism produce. After 35 years of warnings, some inkling of the matter should have crept in here somewhere.
Cognitive dissonance, anyone? This is what Reaganism and Romneyism produce. After 35 years of warnings, some inkling of the matter should have crept in here somewhere.
Clinton, a Democrat, was in office from 1993 to 2000. And now Obama also a Democrat has been in office since 2008.
There is more than just blaming two men, Reagan who is deceased, and Romney who never was President of the United States.
Cognitive dissonance, anyone? This is what Reaganism and Romneyism produce. After 35 years of warnings, some inkling of the matter should have crept in here somewhere.
When Reagan was president the House was controlled by the Democrats for all 8 years and the Senate was controlled by the Democrats for 2 of his 8 years in office. For most of the time the Democrats have controlled either one or both houses of congress. It was not untill a short time and for a short time that Republican controlled both houses of congress. Today the house is only marginally controlled by the Republicans while the Senate and the Executive branch are controlled by the Democrats. Romney never became President and his ideas are not relevant because of that. Not to say that his ideas are not relevant at all. I am sure he would have been a great president. Since he was not elected though, it really does not matter what he thinks or believes now does it?
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.
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.
