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.
The northern part of Minneapolis is very dangerous. My aunt lives up there in a trashy neighborhood. There are drive-by shootings practically every week or so. My aunt has borded up all of her windows and can't even use the front room of her home because of all the gunfire. There are many dangerous gangs up there that fight with each other regularly. The neighborhoods appear on the news at least every week. It is not a good place to live at all.
IT IS?????? Oh my god, all this time I've lived here and no one's ever told me about this - here I've been blindly thinking that my N Mpls neighborhood has very low crime and is a safe city neighborhood, but after reading your post, maybe those crime stats that I absorb every week are wrong (or for those that watch the Wire - juked)....and maybe the quiet, peaceful walks my wife and I take through our serene neighborhood most evenings are just a big delusion that I've somehow dreamt up in my head???
And it gets worse mk - I've also worked for several years in the Jordan/ Near North neighborhoods of Minneapolis, and despite not ever having been a victim of crime (and only seeing or suspecting a few minor incidents) and enjoying my time in the neighborhoods - here all this time, unbeknownst to me, I really should have been constantly fearing for my life and avoiding all of these above-mentioned areas like the plague?????!!!!!
Why couldn't someone have told me this before I got a job and bought a home in North Minneapolis....where were you then mk10063955, WHERE WERE YOU THEN?????
P.S. - Please do tell us the neighborhood and/ or intersection that your aunt lives on mk, and the fact that you call it "Northern Minneapolis" lets me know that you have no real local knowledge of the area.
Last edited by Camden Northsider; 11-25-2008 at 05:43 PM..
Don't believe the hype! Minneapolis is not bad, though it has it trouble spots. Believe me when I say it's safer than other crime ridden cities like Detroit and Chicago.
I'm not sure what sort of response you're looking for, because I'm not following your train of thought...from your quote above, the respondent did not indicate they had first-hand experience, but that they think something is a certain way. Then you appeared to present that as evidence...
I fully admit that I just may not be following your point all that well, but I have been going over the past page trying to parse it out.
I said that I was under the impression that you could not order things online with an EBT card. Then, as I was not sure, I asked if anyone had any firsthand experience. If you look a little more carefully, it was not a quote. I regret any lack of clarity!
Don't believe the hype! Minneapolis is not bad, though it has it trouble spots. Believe me when I say it's safer than other crime ridden cities like Detroit and Chicago.
North Minneapolis is not a desirable area - no doubt, but I still feel safer in downtown Minneapolis than I would in LA. I think all "big cities" have "bad" areas, you just need to know where to to and where to stay away from. One of the posts above talked about Brooklyn Center and, yes, it has some bad areas, but around it is some very nice cities, for example, Brooklyn Park - where I live, and Champlin, among a few, which are very nice cities. I know crime doesn't stop at city boundaries, but at the same time, not all of Minneapolis is a crime area.
This little scenario is simply untrue and it would be possible to even do such a thing. A family's TANF (temporary assistance to needy families) monies/ grants are tracked on a national level, the financial worker assisting someone to apply for benefits here in Hennepin County would be able to tell how many months and how long someone was on welfare in the state in which they came from and how much time they are eligible to continue receiving it after relocating to MN (time limits are the same throughout the nation, and the formulas used as to how much a person gets vary only based on the local cost of living - welfare reform limited the amount of time a person can receive welfare to a 5 year lifetime limit). Plus, anyone receiving welfare (and we're talking about assistance to families/ single moms, not SSI or anything in which case you have to have a documented disability and go through generally a years-long process to be accepted) has to pretty much work a full-time job, be this in looking for employment, volunteering, working, getting basic education, etc. to receive benefits (and believe me, proof has to get turned in on a WEEKLY basis in and it has to be verified by the caseworker).
There are so many urban legends about all of the people from Chicago 'emigrating' from Chicago to come capitalize off of Mpls' "loose" welfare system - we don't have a loose welfare system in MN because these monies are regulated on both a federal and state level and there have not been increases to cash grant amounts to families in I believe decades now. There may be people moving here from Chicago but it's generally because people hear there is a lot of opportunity here. What MSP does have that's the model for the nation is an excellent high-performing network of human services agencies that act as a better safety net (not in benefits/ cash but with caseworkers and services that will help someone out) in MSP than in other areas of the country and we probably spend less money than other states doing so. Yet there are still way too many - thousands - of people that fall through the cracks here than, IMO, should be tolerated by a state that prides itself on its wealth, progressiveness, compassion, and acceptance of everyone).
It amazes me that people still believe this tired argument about being so welfare-friendly and "too much taxpayer dollars being spent on welfare programs" - it's BS and the ignorance actually offends me. I can vouch for the fact that the state has steadily cut programs and services year after year throughout the Bush administration and you can see the results everywhere you look in this city.
And for the record, every penny a govt/ nonprofit org spends has to have an audit trail a mile long and be on a list of approved items as mandated by its funders, and it's never enough to cover their actual expenses - the nonprofit industry scrapes by on so little it's unbelievable that a number are still able to keep their doors open in this economy. People are fine with the $750 billion Wall Street bailout where execs get to cash in after decades of paying themselves millions upon millions of dollars and then take the staff out to celebrate on lavish 400K and above staff retreats, etc. Or how about the weapon order for Iraq where people just seemed to misplace or couldn't account for millions of dollars of weapons that had been purchased - whoops, our bad! But allocate funding to pay a well-educated job counselor or human services worker $25 - 35K a year to work full-time (and usually way overtime) jobs helping hundreds of people to become self-sufficient, create a better quality of life for individuals/ families, and work to eliminate social ills like unemployment, violent crime, homelessness, illiteracy, foreclosures, etc. each and every day of the year?? - how intolerable. Go volunteer with an agency - see if your worldview changes a little....
My relative was told that she could work part-time, about 10 hours per week for 5 years by her case worker. She isnt the brightest so she could be wrong. She receives the following:
$350 for food (she told me $300 something)
$350 in cash (she told me $300 something)
$400 free insurance for her and the baby(I have assigned a value of $400)
$600 Rental assistance (approximate value)
$300 approximate value of earned income credit and child credit per month
$2,000 total in benefits plus she gets to keep every penny she earns (besides FICA) because she doesnt pay taxes which is approximately $3800 a year plus child support.
To have that much after tax income, a single person would have to make about $33,000 a year. Nice of the government to give her all the benefits of the middle class without having to work for it. All the tax benefits and assistance really adds up.
I'm not saying we shouldn't help people, but I don't think anyone should be allowed to be on the program for 5 consecutive years. It should be more of 12 months consecutive max, 5 years lifetime. I dont want people starving on the streets, but I think our welfare program has gotten out of hand.
Last edited by Minneapolis Guy; 05-12-2009 at 05:53 PM..
My relative was told that she could work part-time, about 10 hours per week for 5 years by her case worker. She isnt the brightest so she could be wrong. She receives the following:
$350 for food (she told me $300 something)
$350 in cash (she told me $300 something)
$400 free insurance for her and the baby(I have assigned a value of $400)
$600 Rental assistance (approximate value)
$300 approximate value of earned income credit and child credit per month
$2,000 total in benefits plus she gets to keep every penny she earns (besides FICA) because she doesnt pay taxes which is approximately $3800 a year plus child support.
To have that much after tax income, a single person would have to make about $33,000 a year. Nice of the government to give her all the benefits of the middle class without having to work for it. All the tax benefits and assistance really adds up.
I'm not saying we shouldn't help people, but I don't think anyone should be allowed to be on the program for 5 consecutive years. It should be more of 12 months consecutive max, 5 years lifetime. I dont want people starving on the streets, but I think our welfare program has gotten out of hand.
It is 5 years lifetime- that's the law, unless the person has very documented "issues" preventing them from being able to work (most often a disability). And a person can't just work 10 hrs/ week for 5 years, they would be placed in "sanction" (on notice of grant reduction/ elimination) and required to job search, do a volunteer job, go to school (ABE/ GED, etc.- generally college is frowned down upon), or go to training for at least 12 more hours a week to stay in compliance and meet the federal participation rate- only so many hours of job search, school, and training is allowed in the program each year, so after these hours are exhausted, it is expected that the participant will be working at least part-time/ 22 hours a week if not more.
Also, I think you are really stretching by adding the earned income tax credit in there- most all Americans benefit from tax credits so this seems unfair to add into your calculation. Rental assistance and medical assistance is separate from MFIP (family welfare), so adding another $1000 into your equation is somewhat misleading- many persons work FT and get free medical, and persons are not always eligible for housing subsidies. And it's not like many Americans don't benefit from government assistance/ subsidies of some form or another (if not the majority- federal student loans, social security, persons w/ disabled children, etc.), so it's unfair to target single mothers or the poorest of families and misleading to try and add up any potential benefit that they might receive to illustrate your point.
The amount of cash benefits families receive hasn't increased since the 80s I believe, so your theory of things "getting out of hand" is way off-base. More and more families are having to go on family welfare due to increased job layoffs/ poor economy, maybe ask a few of your recently laid off neighbors with dependent minor children how well they're doing on welfare (and why they're on it) so you can get a little broader perspective on this.
It is 5 years lifetime- that's the law, unless the person has very documented "issues" preventing them from being able to work (most often a disability). And a person can't just work 10 hrs/ week for 5 years, they would be placed in "sanction" (on notice of grant reduction/ elimination) and required to job search, do a volunteer job, go to school (ABE/ GED, etc.- generally college is frowned down upon), or go to training for at least 12 more hours a week to stay in compliance and meet the federal participation rate- only so many hours of job search, school, and training is allowed in the program each year, so after these hours are exhausted, it is expected that the participant will be working at least part-time/ 22 hours a week if not more.
Also, I think you are really stretching by adding the earned income tax credit in there- most all Americans benefit from tax credits so this seems unfair to add into your calculation. Rental assistance and medical assistance is separate from MFIP (family welfare), so adding another $1000 into your equation is somewhat misleading- many persons work FT and get free medical, and persons are not always eligible for housing subsidies. And it's not like many Americans don't benefit from government assistance/ subsidies of some form or another (if not the majority- federal student loans, social security, persons w/ disabled children, etc.), so it's unfair to target single mothers or the poorest of families and misleading to try and add up any potential benefit that they might receive to illustrate your point.
The amount of cash benefits families receive hasn't increased since the 80s I believe, so your theory of things "getting out of hand" is way off-base. More and more families are having to go on family welfare due to increased job layoffs/ poor economy, maybe ask a few of your recently laid off neighbors with dependent minor children how well they're doing on welfare (and why they're on it) so you can get a little broader perspective on this.
I knew you would would respond. Thanks for clearing some of that up, good to know that she cant work 10 hours a week for the whole 5 years. I figured she probably had it wrong. I guess I will see how it all plays out with her. She planned to be on welfare, intentionally had a kid with absolutely no way of supporting it after seeing her friend do the same thing and get all kinds of assistance. She was struggling to get by with no kids while her friend was doing just fine on welfare.
I knew you would would respond. Thanks for clearing some of that up, good to know that she cant work 10 hours a week for the whole 5 years. I figured she probably had it wrong. I guess I will see how it all plays out with her. She planned to be on welfare, intentionally had a kid with absolutely no way of supporting it after seeing her friend do the same thing and get all kinds of assistance. She was struggling to get by with no kids while her friend was doing just fine on welfare.
Many young women do this, often because they don't see themselves as being successful at anything other than being a good mom. Often these young women have worked a series of menial "jobs" but never had a "career".
I believe we need to put more money into our educational system, it's the best opportunity we have to inspire young people and help them to break the curse of "generational poverty".
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.
Oh my god, all this time I've lived here and no one's ever told me about this - here I've been blindly thinking that my N Mpls neighborhood has very low crime and is a safe city neighborhood, but after reading your post, maybe those crime stats that I absorb every week are wrong (or for those that watch the Wire - juked)....and maybe the quiet, peaceful walks my wife and I take through our serene neighborhood most evenings are just a big delusion that I've somehow dreamt up in my head???
.
