8th highest poverty rate (Milwaukee, Franklin: condo, how much, neighborhoods)

[Miss_Christmas]

I just read this article on jsonline. Any ideas on why this is or how this can be turned around?

JS Online: Poverty worsens in city; 26% live below the line

[adam76]

It is a sad, seemingly never ending cycle of poverty passed on from generation to generation. Even those who want to dig themselves out will find very little in the way of good paying jobs in the central city and lack of public transport to where the jobs are. Look at the featured person in the story you linked to, it is a grandmother raising five kids. Where are the parents? I'm sure this poor woman is doing everything she possibly can but the sad fact is there is a strong chance these kids will continue the cycle of poverty when they reach adulthood.

There is also a stunning lack of leadership among city and county elected officials, present and former. Michael McGee has the admiration of many and yet he uses his influence to shake down business owners and make outrageous statements to the media. Both McGee and Marvin Pratt seemed to do little besides cry racism. I'm not here to debate whether or not their accusations are true, but I think there is little doubt it serves no purpose other than to inflame and raise their own persona. The mayor should be featured on the back of a milk carton, Have You Seen This Person? Both Lee Holloway and Willie Hines are in positions of prominence and influence and yet what has really been accomplished? Gary George lived in his Grafton mansion while pretending to be a resident of his district before finally getting thrown out by the voters. Then there are the central city charity groups that claimed to help its residents while lining their own pockets before blowing up in scandal -- the SDC and OIC. Gwen Moore seems to be a smart and thoughtful person but there is little she can do on the federal level besides raise awareness. Maybe she should run for mayor?

I'm far from any social expert but I truly believe change has to come from within before any real improvement is made on the situation in the central city. I think if any change actually started to happen you would see taxpayers and charity groups more willing to participate and invest in the central city. Yes I do think that many, both businesses and individuals, have thrown up their hands and given up at a time when they are needed the most. Changing the perception of the central city and the people who live there can only come through strong and intelligent leadership.

[43north87west]

Put an end to:

-drugs
-gangs
-poor and/or incomplete education, drop out rates
-teenage pregnancy
-absentee parents

A grandmother who is 41 and raising 5 grandchildren is a problem. One or more of the above is responsible, either directly or indirectly, and it seems that most of the above are often related. The "Racial Tensions" thread is a nice indicator of what takes place when a person helps out. Nothing good. For that reason, I must agree with the first response to this question. IMO, change has to start in the community first, then there will be a worthwhile reason for people to help. Poor inner city leadership in this city (among other cities), perpetuates the problem and keeps potentially useful assistance out. Milwaukee is not alone.

[adam76]

Here is an article on JSOnline about how the revitalization of North Ave has been noticed by the nation of Nigeria. The statistics say that as a whole the city's poverty situation is getting worse but there are some areas of the central city that are improving. I would like to note that the positive changes that have occurred along North Ave, and MLK Drive as well, have come mostly from within those who live there.

JS Online: Central city inspires African nation

Its going to be things like this, and the people who made it happen, that will be part of the solution.

[Nuclear_Art]

There really has to be a social safety net for the poor. Welfare actually did more to help them than Thompson's W-2 which still manages to keep most of the families in poverty. Drugs, gangs, broken families, teenage pregnancies are the result of poverty not vice versa. All of the money the government spends on more police to fight violence could be used to subsidize programs to help the poor escape poverty with greater effect.

[43north87west]

Originally Posted by Nuclear_Art

There really has to be a social safety net for the poor. Welfare actually did more to help them than Thompson's W-2 which still manages to keep most of the families in poverty.

Welfare as a safety net is fine, but welfare as an occupation is not fine. We can not permit welfare to become an occupation as it was at one time. I disagree that merely pouring money into welfare, is going to prompt people to exit the welfare system and move on.

Originally Posted by Nuclear_Art

Drugs, gangs, broken families, teenage pregnancies are the result of poverty not vice versa.

Actually, those are a result of decisions that people make because they don't know any better, or because they don't care. Just dishing out more welfare dollars won't result in the remediation of society. I don't think that cities like Milwaukee, Chicago, Minneapolis, St. Louis, Cleveland, Detroit, and others, will facilitate change just by dialing up the amount of money spent on welfare.

[Nuclear_Art]

Originally Posted by 43north87west

Welfare as a safety net is fine, but welfare as an occupation is not fine.

Our government regularly and eagerly doles out corporate welfare that would make welfare queens green with envy. Look at how much government money has gone to support Manpower in Milwaukee when it won't bring in new jobs.

The stories about hundreds of recipients having the easy life was manufactured fiction. People who make it an occupation are a minority of the recipients. It isn't the norm that should be used to judge the program. Unfortunately it was and the urban legend persists.

[43north87west]

Interesting that you got the words "easy life".

I said, "Welfare as a safety net is fine, but welfare as an occupation is not fine." This city does not need career welfare recipients, nor do we need to invest in any programs that permit career welfare recipients or any abuse of the system. Also the urban legend of the career welfare recipient was anything but an urban legend. When able bodied people suddenly area forced to go to work, and they didn't have to work under the old system, they were obviously able under the old system too. And there were more than a 'few hundred' of them.

Corporate welfare is a different issue. The existence of corporate welfare isn't a convincing reason to increase social welfare. To me it isn't related.

[Nuclear_Art]

The issue that you seem to be avoiding is that for any program you will have corruption and people abusing the system. Was the fact that people abused welfare enough to get rid of the program? Abuse of the system happens just as much in corporate welfare which is why I did mention it. Obviously those abuses and corruption were never enough to abolish it as the welfare system was abolished.

[quijote]

Another problem facing the city of Milwaukee is the migration of people with money to the suburbs. Some work has been done to try to keep or attract middle class people in the city, but these efforts (condo development, etc. in east side/downtown/third ward corridor) are shadowed by white flight and money flight from other neighborhoods (southside, west side, etc.) to surrounding communities (Oak Creek, Franklin, etc.). Is it really surprising that the large cities with the highest poverty rates are also among the most segregated cities in the U.S.?