I thought this week I would address some of the statements made by Paul Ryan on Bill Bennett’s Morning In America radio show on March 12.  It is challenging to pick a place to start in regards to what IS wrong with what Ryan had to say about what he claimed to be both the causes and the realities of those who exist under the poverty line. However, I think it is safe to start with a direct quote from Ryan stating that, “Your buddy Charles Murray or Bob Putnam over at Harvard, those guys have written books on this. Which is, we have got this tailspin of culture in our inner cities in particular of men not working and just generations of men not even thinking about working or learning the value and the culture of work. And so there’s a real culture problem here that has to be dealt with” (Rep. Paul Ryan, Bill Bennett’s Morning In America” radio show, March 12, 2014) What I essentially got from this was that Paul Ryan is not just blaming poverty on poor people, but he is claiming that within “inner cities” there is a literal culture of human beings (specifically men, according to Ryan) that are “not even thinking about working” and thus are not interested in the “values” and the “culture” of work…. I was mortified. Through this interview on the “Morning in America” radio station, Paul Ryan essentially verbalized what we have acknowledged in this class as one of the major issues with poverty in the United States. This issue is that while the percentage of Americans who live in poverty continues to rise, while funding for government aid continues to get cut, while low income housing continues to disappear, while programs and services continue to change by request of political figures who have never actually experienced poverty, Paul Ryan has decided that it is the sheer culture of “these people” that is perpetuating poverty in America. He created a discourse about poverty and those who exist in poverty that not only blamed the millions of Americans who’s lives are characterized by the realities of living beneath the poverty line, but characterized a culture that “these people” all exist in and thus dictates their desire to not simply just not work, but Ryan goes so far as to suggest that the idea of existing above the poverty line is not even within reach of their psyche. He suggests that “they” are content in “their” poverty and practically suggests that “these people” believe to be above the concept or “culture” of work.   To assume that this statement has a racist foundation (or is blatantly racist, depending upon how you chose to view it) is not incorrect. For starters, he referenced a man in his interview who he claims to have “written books”, on this theory of a culture of poverty and men in inner cities choosing not to work. What was interesting about this reference to me was that the man he mentions is Charles Murray… a white nationalist who has used “racist pseudoscience and misleading statistics to argue that social inequality is caused by the genetic inferiority of certain people.”(Southern Poverty Law Center).  When later questioned about the racist connotations of the statements made on “Morning in America”, Paul Ryan claimed that race was not at all a part of his message. As quoted by the Southern Poverty Law Center, “According to Murray, disadvantaged groups are disadvantaged because, on average, they cannot compete with white men, who are intellectually, psychologically and morally superior. Murray advocates the total elimination of the welfare state, affirmative action and the Department of Education, arguing that public policy cannot overcome the innate deficiencies that cause unequal social and educational outcomes.”(Souther Poverty Law Center)… So through my understanding, to reference Charles Murray as a glowing reference suggests that Ryan not only believes the writings of a white nationalist to be a valid form of statistical proof for a “culture of poverty”, but that Ryan is also reading and utilizing white nationalist beliefs in the decision making behind his political stances. As well as that, to blindly reference an entire demographic of people as “from inner cities” does not in any real way help his case, seeing as how that statement, besides being too vague to even be used to designate a particular location, is riddled with an association to people of color. Seeing as how more predominately urbanized areas in the United States (if that is what Ryan is referring to when he says inner cities) are more greatly inhabited by people of color. I was shocked at how a politician could make the conscious choice to reference an entire demographic of people as existing in a “culture of poverty” through what he claims to be as essentially their own doing, and then to never specify who these people are, but simply states that they are from “inner cities”. Ryan literally uses this essentially undefined “group of people” to justify his desire to get rid of the social safety net programs used in the United States that are currently assisting over 90% of people in America! As we have been discussing in this class there is an American discourse about poverty that aims to blame the individual. The reality of the current state of poverty in the U.S. as many (not white nationalist) authors, researchers, etc. have documented, is that more people exist in poverty than not.  Poverty is not, and has not been a “personal problem or implication” for poor people, because we exist in a society where the majority is poor. The more our politicians continue to ignore the issue of poverty as lived experiences of a majority of the American people, the longer it is going to take for it to be properly addressed in the future. The further we cut funding for government based aid and the further we continue to push away and ignore the needs of “these people”(as put by Ryan), the longer and harder it is going to be once politicians like Ryan finally realize that this issue of poverty is too large to be swept under the rug anymore. Beyond the intrinsic racism that riddled the statements made on March 12, besides the overwhelming ignorance and injustice that is a politician referencing a white nationalist as his source of evidence for a political claim against the American people, and besides the fact that he at no point took responsibility for the role of policy or programs put in place by politicians like himself as a cause of poverty, Ryan’s theory of a “poverty culture” and of men who “don’t think about work” just simply is untrue. Since we have learned to view poverty as a structural problem through or readings and discussion in this class, the fact that Ryan was unwilling to attribute any of the ways in which government aid, policies, and programs have not been working to help get poor people out of poverty, but instead blames the people as failing to utilize these programs correctly proves how this discourse that is created by particular politicians is damaging not just our discourse about the American majority who exist in poverty, but how it is changing our mindsets as a society. Ryan’s statements insinuate that we have reached a time in the history of America where the systems don’t fail the people but the people fail the systems. If the policies aren’t making a difference, then they need to be changed. Welfare queen ideologies and blaming poor people as “taking advantage of the system” have both been statistically disproved and cannot continue to be the way that the people who are supposed to be dealing with the issues facing the American people can continue to sidestep having to make any real change.  I am glad that I am taking this class, because I can confidently say that I have an accurate understanding of poverty in way that it seems even some politicians and policy makers do not.

References:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/12/paul-ryan-inner-cities_n_4949165.html

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/03/12/1284169/-Paul-Ryan-references-White-Supremacist-in-Inner-City-Men-too-Lazy-to-Work-comment

After going over the readings in Vincent Lyon-Callos: Inequality, Poverty, And Neoliberal Governance: Activist Ethnography in the Homeless Sheltering Industry, we get an outline of the larger problem (hunger and homelessness) by attacking the micro incidents as mentioned in class. All the sub categories make up what we may think are the reasons why hunger and homelessness is not decreasing and instead increasing. One of the main points my group focused on was medicalizing homelessness. It is the theory or the usage of diagnosing, detecting and treating disorders. Most of the common disorders found for those who have become homeless in depression, sexual assault, loss of family member(s), and many others. It is the idea that there is something wrong with the individual not the society as a whole. It is the production of self-blame and self-governing that will allow one to get self-help treatments. For example if a homeless individual has a drug problem they can choose to go through a 12 step program, if another individual was sexually assaulted they go to counseling, things of this sort. By allowing volunteers and staff members of shelters to continue this belief and practice it promotes the repetition and assumptions that homeless people have something wrong with them, the notion that they have become homeless for one of those main reasons that are typically related or assumed of homeless in general.

The material and the first few chapters of the book are truly intriguing. The question that was asked by the professor startled me. Is this what is really occurring or does the author just want us to believe this. I think many of the stuff mentioned is true, at least from my personal experiences helping out in the shelters but I don’t think it is always the case.

This week on a popular website there was a person who was around our age who shared his experience of hitch hiking the around the US with no money, phone, or ID. He slept outside and ate for free.

This struck me so much because he shares the views that so many of the “hobos” did in the 1890 to 1920s, the idea of just traveling around the United States and making it an adventure. He really did look at it as an adventure, he in essence didn’t do it because he had to, but because he wanted to. It’s just a striking resemblance to the vagabonds and the way they acted, care free, just enjoying traveling around with no job. He really was a modern-day. When he was asked what made him decide to do it his response was “I was 20, I wanted to radically change the direction of my life, and what better way to do so? I learned about things I could never have imagined existed and I’ll tell you it was one HELL of an education.”

You would think that this whole vagabond mentality wouldn’t come up again, that people would be happy with how they live now and you just wouldn’t expect someone to willing go through something like this in our modern age where the idea of being without a home and job is looked so down upon.

Here is a link to the full reddit discussion.
http://www.reddit.com/r/AMA/comments/20wx5g/i_spent_almost_2_years_hitchhiking_throughout_the/

And here is a tabled view of all the questions he responded to and his answers to them.

http://www.reddit.com/r/tabled/comments/20xrb2/

Last week, I had the opportunity to meet one of the residents at my local shelter who became homeless this year. I was informed by staff members that he was struggling to find employment, due to his criminal record.  I wanted to discover the causes of the circumstances he lives and how he maintains to survive without receiving federal assistance.  His conversation relates to this week’s reading from chapter 6 “Helping Homeless Youth” in Inequality, Poverty, and Neoliberal Governance by Vincent Lyon-Callo.  I saw he was overwhelmed by his expression towards the case management working on his case, the frustration in seeking employment, and his upcoming residential contract termination.  He kindly shares his experiences regarding the career and education services provide as a requirement for self-suffiency.  He stated, “  “I am still stuck in that wall, what happens if I push it through it….am I supposed to keep going..keep walking..stop there..you know”.

Most of the homeless people lack education and support system from the staff that discourage them from seeking help in order to develop a plan to achieve their goals in obtaining a stable life.  This man like everyone else feels pressure to have a job without having the proper education to succeed.  How can staff normalize these individuals, when staff are not patient and willingly to understand profoundly the homelessness realities and people’s conditions.   “Instead of starting from 100 to 1…people are not educated and staff do not understand how frustrated they feel. How can I do it when I don’t understand it…? I am not producing I still need to learn how to use it” says the respondent.  In chapter 6 explains that homeless people want to be themselves not be “fixed” because it seems like a way that people are labeling them distinctive as the rest of society.  Homeless people may object to follow regulations and unwillingly to cooperate with staff.  Staff usually give up easily with the homeless people without understanding the major point’s homeless people want to develop to lead them on their path to attainment.  In my opinion I do believe is true, how can we force people to become educated, when we are not educated ourselves.  We need to place an example in order to teach other the leadership skills that they were taught to help others in need.

For our book presentation, my group read “At Home on the Street: People, Poverty, and a Hidden Culture of Homelessness” by Wasserman and Clair. This book is the result of four years of ethnographic research about homelessness in Alabama. The purpose of their studies was to understand what life is like for homeless individuals and why it is that they choose to not live in shelters. By doing so, they endeavored to determine whether or not policies and programs targeted towards this issue are effective or not. In order to gather this information, the two men stayed in shelters, slept on the street, and did all that they could to get to know the homeless communities in Birmingham on a personal level. That is because Clair and Wasserman wanted to collect data in a way that avoided the typical “insufficient and elitist” approach that most researchers have. They believe that power does not belong solely to the person conducting the research. That is why they decided to live amongst their subjects instead of just interviewing them.

Near the end of the book the two are describing what they believe are solutions for the issue of homelessness. They elucidate that “we cannot ‘fix’ homelessness if we do not know those who are homelessness.” (p.217). This was one of the wisest suggestions for rectifying homelessness that I have heard thus far. I agree with Wasserman and Clair in that homelessness in not a “what” issue, it is a “who” issue. It is impossible to determine what is best for someone if you do not know that person. Homelessness is not a generalized or linear subject. It is one that is conditional and impacts each individual very differently. Therefore, there is no simple answer for how to fix this problem. I definitely think that their research was a step in the right direction for determining more effective strategies for aiding those who are homeless in America.

In an article written for NBC New York, there has been a rise in homeless in the local youth population. Not only has the economic recession contributed to this, but the aftermath of Sandy has put a damper on many people’s living situation. One of the school districts on Suffolk County, William Floyd, has approximately 500 homeless students. The community understands and sees the struggles these kids encounter everyday. As such, even though some are able to get temporary housing, it is usually inconveniently far from the school district itself. With the rise in technology usage, most of these 500 students do not have the means to keep up their studies like other students. Additionally, some of these students go with out food. The schools in this area used to have a “homeless liason” or extra funding to aid these students. Yet, with all things, the recession took a chunk of that out of the schools budgets for these students. The fact that the majority of people who are homeless fall into the category of young students is disgusting. We show so much concern for those who are elderly in rough situations. As we discussed in class, there are so many social welfare programs that benefit the elderly. Yet, the youth are our future and they deserve to be cared for when no one else can care for them. As cold as it is, the elderly had many more opportunities, and have received aid in numerous ways. The younger people are the ones who have faced the budget cuts and dealt with all the economic repercussions. How can we expect there to be a brighter future if do not provide the means for those students to overcome obstacles society has placed upon them?

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Homeless-Students-Long-Island-Schools-Increase-250710011.html

Somehow when I read the piece entitled, “Public Radio and the Poor,” the phrase “money talks” immediately came to mind.  How true it is, really.  This article talks about Chicago Public Radio Station WBEZ posting four of its stations in  south side neighborhoods, poor neighborhoods whose stories typically would not be covered unless real-time human beings were physically present in those areas living and breathing their real-time stories.  Stories of the hood involved the high drop out rate at the high schools, teen pregnancy and parenthood, and the ineffective efforts to address these issues, etc.  The keynote example, however, highlighted the fact that the real mouthpiece for highlighting problems in the hood still emanates from those of financial stature.  A congressman’s son was shot across the street from a  south side hospital, but this hospital – as is true for all south side hospitals – did not have a trauma center.  The boy died, and his congressman father felt that he might have lived had the hospital been equipped to deal with his injuries.  His, the congressman’s, voice is the voice that is heard by people who hold the purse strings that could make a difference.

Perhaps it important that the masses hear the stories of the people struggling in the underbellies of our cities.  Many surely care.  Most feel helpless – myself often among that group.  But perhaps we are all waiting to be delivered from evil/unrighteousness by those with means who are somehow affected by the plight of those without.  It is only when the structural inequality affects those who typically are privileged that the issues come to the attention of those with the power to make a difference.

Most of my research for this week was focused on my second book report and the internship progress reports that were done last Thursday. While doing work for both of these projects I noticed that the most important thing people can do for homeless people is to give them a hand up, not just a hand out (which is actually one of the motto’s of my internship organization). I focused a lot on this during the last week but now that those are mostly finished I have looked deeper into one of the topics that interested me about a month ago.

One thing that I found to be really interesting from a couple class sessions ago was the video we watched about homeless “villages” where people either live in tents or have erected low-cost structures for a large number of people to live in as a type of community. I was doing more research into this when I came across an article published by the New York Times called “Small World, Big Idea”. It was published very recently, about a month ago, and focused on a place called “Quixote Village” in Olympia, Washington. The idea behind Quixote Village is that small one bedroom, one bath “cottages” were erected as a community for homeless and unemployed residents of Washington State would have a place to live. The structures are modestly built, but have provided shelter and living space for these people for months now.

Quixote Village is an anomaly. There are almost no other villages like this one, espeically in Western Washington. Many of the homeless camps in that area are tent villages erected in the woods or on the sides of train tracks. Michael Tortorello, the author of the article says, “Beyond its recent good fortune, the settlement was — and is — exceptional.Quixote Village, as it is now called, practices self-governance, with elected leadership and membership rules. While a nonprofit board called Panza funds and guides the project, needing help is not the same thing as being helpless. As Mr. Johnson likes to say, ‘I’m homeless, not stupid.'” This statement definitely makes one think about the fact that there are no other places like this for people who just need a way to get back on their feet.

A quote from the article gives a good snap shot of the community that makes up Quixote Village. The writer describes the community, saying, “Most of that demographic, an estimated 450 souls, is unemployed. While the residents of Quixote Village are expected to pay 30 percent of their income toward rent, 15 of the 29 individuals reported a sum of zero. Ms. Segel added that the average annual income for the rest of the residents — including wages, pensions and Social Security payments — is about $3,100 each.” (Tortorello, 2014)

Overall, I am very intrigued by the ideas behind places like Quixote Village and want to know if anyone else thinks that this is a viable option for changing the way homeless people are living.

After several weeks of learning about the state of the US in its struggle with hunger, poverty, and homelessness, I was pretty disappointed and disconcerted by the reality of the struggle and just how bad it is. I will fully admit I left class each day feeling really depressed, angry, and uncertain about how to fix the problem. It is such a complex, gargantuan issue with many branches, and it does seem difficult to tackle it. Nonetheless, it’s important to know these facts, the stereotypes, the stories about the impoverished and the homeless. It’s really opened my eyes and I have a much deeper respect for human endurance.

After Thursday’s class, I felt for the first time since January a little more optimistic about the problems. Working with my internship has been moving and hearing about my fellow students’ internships made me feel more relieved to know that there are people out there who are doing something to alleviate the problem. Obviously none of these organizations are perfect; obviously none of them are tackling the structural problems. My internship’s organization probably could weigh in its opinion on public policy and handling these issues, but their goal isn’t to fix structural problems and I imagine that my peers are noticing that as well with their internships. These organizations are trying to save people and to fill in the gaps that structure creates.  In spite of this, it made me feel much more optimistic to know that there is a portion of society who does have compassion, kindness, and generosity to do this kind of work. It’s not easy, and I admire them for doing it.

Today when reading through current articles relating to homelessness, I cam e across one that offered some interesting insight and points of view that I had no previously considered. The article was entitled “Criminalizing Homelessness” by Jerry Gordon and was published on the Daily Camera site.  The overarching theme of this editorial was the need to move away from the current tendency that our society has adopted of differentiating between “the good homeless versus the bad homeless”, using this as a basis to help some but not others.

I thought that this idea paralleled well with the background research that I had done on my internship site, which states that they offer services for all “worthy poor”. However, distinguishing between those who are worthy and not worthy poor seems to be difficult, if not entirely impossible. It seems as though each person could have their own definitions and standards of what qualifies as “worthy” of help and what does not.

The article by Gordon also spoke of the alienation of homeless individuals that takes place in our nation today. It is undeniable from the texts that we have read in class that there does exist a separation between mainstream society and the homeless. The creation of this “otherness” of those living on the streets has increased the fear that the general public has of the homeless, based on assumptions and negative generalizations. Because of this increased fear and anxiety when around those living on the streets, their presence is being made illegal in more and more public spaces all the time. They are pushed from one city to another to another, constantly being forced to pack up and leave, with the general message of the public being that homeless are not welcome or wanted. Gordon discusses the current national trend of criminalizing the lives of homeless people entirely by making any and all their activities illegal. In conclusion to this tendency, he states that this approach is “a social policy failure”.

http://www.dailycamera.com/guest-opinions/ci_25346344/criminalizing-homelessness?source=most_emailed