50 Economic Numbers From 2011 That Are Almost Too Crazy To Believe
#1 A staggering 48 percent of all Americans are either considered to be "low income" or are living in poverty.
#2 Approximately 57 percent of all children in the United States are living in homes that are either considered to be "low income" or impoverished.
#3 If the number of Americans that "wanted jobs" was the same today as it was back in 2007, the "official" unemployment rate put out by the U.S. government would be up to 11 percent.
#4 The average amount of time that a worker stays unemployed in the United States is now over 40 weeks.
#5 One recent survey found that 77 percent of all U.S. small businesses do not plan to hire any more workers.
#6 There are fewer payroll jobs in the United States today than there were back in 2000 even though we have added 30 million extra people to the population since then.
#7 Since December 2007, median household income in the United States has declined by a total of 6.8% once you account for inflation.
#8 According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 16.6 million Americans were self-employed back in December 2006. Today, that number has shrunk to 14.5 million.
#9 A Gallup poll from earlier this year found that approximately one out of every five Americans that do have a job consider themselves to be underemployed.
#10 According to author Paul Osterman, about 20 percent of all U.S. adults are currently working jobs that pay poverty-level wages.
#11 Back in 1980, less than 30% of all jobs in the United States were low income jobs. Today, more than 40% of all jobs in the United States are low income jobs.
#12 Back in 1969, 95 percent of all men between the ages of 25 and 54 had a job. In July, only 81.2 percent of men in that age group had a job.
#13 One recent survey found that one out of every three Americans would not be able to make a mortgage or rent payment next month if they suddenly lost their current job.
#14 The Federal Reserve recently announced that the total net worth of U.S. households declined by 4.1 percent in the 3rd quarter of 2011 alone.
#15 According to a recent study conducted by the BlackRock Investment Institute, the ratio of household debt to personal income in the United States is now 154 percent.
#16 As the economy has slowed down, so has the number of marriages. According to a Pew Research Center analysis, only 51 percent of all Americans that are at least 18 years old are currently married. Back in 1960, 72 percent of all U.S. adults were married.
#17 The U.S. Postal Service has lost more than 5 billion dollars over the past year.
#18 In Stockton, California home prices have declined 64 percent from where they were at when the housing market peaked.
#19 Nevada has had the highest foreclosure rate in the nation for 59 months in a row.
#20 If you can believe it, the median price of a home in Detroit is now just $6000.
#21 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 18 percent of all homes in the state of Florida are sitting vacant. That figure is 63 percent larger than it was just ten years ago.
#22 New home construction in the United States is on pace to set a brand new all-time record low in 2011.
#23 As I have written about previously, 19 percent of all American men between the ages of 25 and 34 are now living with their parents.
#24 Electricity bills in the United States have risen faster than the overall rate of inflation for five years in a row.
#25 According to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, health care costs accounted for just 9.5% of all personal consumption back in 1980. Today they account for approximately 16.3%.
#26 One study found that approximately 41 percent of all working age Americans either have medical bill problems or are currently paying off medical debt.
#27 If you can believe it, one out of every seven Americans has at least 10 credit cards.
#28 The United States spends about 4 dollars on goods and services from China for every one dollar that China spends on goods and services from the United States.
#29 It is being projected that the U.S. trade deficit for 2011 will be 558.2 billion dollars.
#30 The retirement crisis in the United States just continues to get worse. According to the Employee Benefit Research Institute, 46 percent of all American workers have less than $10,000 saved for retirement, and 29 percent of all American workers have less than $1,000 saved for retirement.
#31 Today, one out of every six elderly Americans lives below the federal poverty line.
#32 According to a study that was just released, CEO pay at America's biggest companies rose by 36.5% in just one recent 12 month period.
#33 Today, the "too big to fail" banks are larger than ever. The total assets of the six largest U.S. banks increased by 39 percent between September 30, 2006 and September 30, 2011.
#34 The six heirs of Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton have a net worth that is roughly equal to the bottom 30 percent of all Americans combined.
#35 According to an analysis of Census Bureau data done by the Pew Research Center, the median net worth for households led by someone 65 years of age or older is 47 times greater than the median net worth for households led by someone under the age of 35.
#36 If you can believe it, 37 percent of all U.S. households that are led by someone under the age of 35 have a net worth of zero or less than zero.
#37 A higher percentage of Americans is living in extreme poverty (6.7%) than has ever been measured before.
#38 Child homelessness in the United States is now 33 percent higher than it was back in 2007.
#39 Since 2007, the number of children living in poverty in the state of California has increased by 30 percent.
#40 Sadly, child poverty is absolutely exploding all over America. According to the National Center for Children in Poverty, 36.4% of all children that live in Philadelphia are living in poverty, 40.1% of all children that live in Atlanta are living in poverty, 52.6% of all children that live in Cleveland are living in poverty and 53.6% of all children that live in Detroit are living in poverty.
#41 Today, one out of every seven Americans is on food stamps and one out of every four American children is on food stamps.
#42 In 1980, government transfer payments accounted for just 11.7% of all income. Today, government transfer payments account for more than 18 percent of all income.
#43 A staggering 48.5% of all Americans live in a household that receives some form of government benefits. Back in 1983, that number was below 30 percent.
#44 Right now, spending by the federal government accounts for about 24 percent of GDP. Back in 2001, it accounted for just 18 percent.
#45 For fiscal year 2011, the U.S. federal government had a budget deficit of nearly 1.3 trillion dollars. That was the third year in a row that our budget deficit has topped one trillion dollars.
#46 If Bill Gates gave every single penny of his fortune to the U.S. government, it would only cover the U.S. budget deficit for about 15 days.
#47 Amazingly, the U.S. government has now accumulated a total debt of 15 trillion dollars. When Barack Obama first took office the national debt was just 10.6 trillion dollars.
#48 If the federal government began right at this moment to repay the U.S. national debt at a rate of one dollar per second, it would take over 440,000 years to pay off the national debt.
#49 The U.S. national debt has been increasing by an average of more than 4 billion dollars per day since the beginning of the Obama administration.
#50 During the Obama administration, the U.S. government has accumulated more debt than it did from the time that George Washington took office to the time that Bill Clinton took office.
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Heating Aid for Poor Gets Cut
The government just passed a TRILLION-dollar budget, but there is no money for the poor, many of whom will die as a result. Meanwhile oil companies continue to post tax-free record profits and fuel prices continue to climb as the cold weather settles in just in time for the holidays.
Northeast states cut heating aid to poor
Mary Power is 92 and worried about surviving another frigid New England winter because deep cuts in federal home heating assistance benefits mean she probably can’t afford enough heating oil to stay warm.
She lives in a drafty trailer in Boston’s West Roxbury neighborhood and gets by on $11,148 a year in pension and Social Security benefits. Her heating aid help this year will drop from $1,035 to $685. With rising heating oil prices, it probably will cost her more than $3,000 for enough oil to keep warm unless she turns her thermostat down to 60 degrees, as she plans.
“I will just have to crawl into bed with the covers over me and stay there,’’ said Power, a widow who worked as a cashier and waitress until she was 80. “I will do what I have to do.’’
Thousands of poor people across the Northeast are bracing for a difficult winter with substantially less home heating aid coming from the federal government.
“They’re playing Russian roulette with people’s lives,’’ said John Drew, who heads Action for Boston Community Development, Inc., which provides aid to low-income residents in Massachusetts.
Read more at link: http://articles.boston.com/2011-12-11/news/30505478_1_heating-aid-heating-oil-home-heating
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Foodstamp Chart
It's important to keep in mind here, that this does not represent a sudden spike in the number of people who just decided that they would rather not work, and chose to get government assistance instead. This chart represents a huge surge in the number of Americans who cannot afford to buy food, even though they may actually still be working, if they are lucky to have a job. The maximum benefit for foodstamps is $200 a month, at a time when food prices are also going through the roof. $46 dollars a week is not easy at all to get by on, and it gets more difficult each month. It is also important to keep in mind here that it is not "easy" to get foodstamps. You must qualify, by proving that you meet the government designated criteria which shows you cannot afford to eat. There are plenty of people who still earn too much to qualify but are actually at risk for serious malnutrition, because of the strict standard set to qualify. And lastly, consider that foodstamps was never designed to be a primary food source, but a supplement. Nonetheless, most people who use foodstamps today rely on this subsidy as their primary source of nutrition for themselves and their family.
Check out the brief at source:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/over-46-million-americans-foodstamps-first-time-ever
 |
| Click to enlarge |
Check out the brief at source:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/over-46-million-americans-foodstamps-first-time-ever
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Monday, November 21, 2011
One in Three Americans Face Poverty, Latest Census Study Shows
They drive cars, but seldom new ones. They earn paychecks, but not big ones. Many own homes. Most pay taxes. Half are married, and nearly half live in the suburbs. None are poor, but many describe themselves as barely scraping by.
Down but not quite out, these Americans form a diverse group sometimes called “near poor” and sometimes simply overlooked — and a new count suggests they are far more numerous than previously understood.
When the Census Bureau this month released a new measure of poverty, meant to better count disposable income, it began altering the portrait of national need. Perhaps the most startling differences between the old measure and the new involves data the government has not yet published, showing 51 million people with incomes less than 50 percent above the poverty line. That number of Americans is 76 percent higher than the official account, published in September. All told, that places 100 million people — one in three Americans — either in poverty or in the fretful zone just above it.
After a lost decade of flat wages and the worst downturn since the Great Depression, the findings can be thought of as putting numbers to the bleak national mood — quantifying the expressions of unease erupting in protests and political swings. They convey levels of economic stress sharply felt but until now hard to measure.
Read the full article at this link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/19/us/census-measures-those-not-quite-in-poverty-but-struggling.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1
Down but not quite out, these Americans form a diverse group sometimes called “near poor” and sometimes simply overlooked — and a new count suggests they are far more numerous than previously understood.
When the Census Bureau this month released a new measure of poverty, meant to better count disposable income, it began altering the portrait of national need. Perhaps the most startling differences between the old measure and the new involves data the government has not yet published, showing 51 million people with incomes less than 50 percent above the poverty line. That number of Americans is 76 percent higher than the official account, published in September. All told, that places 100 million people — one in three Americans — either in poverty or in the fretful zone just above it.
After a lost decade of flat wages and the worst downturn since the Great Depression, the findings can be thought of as putting numbers to the bleak national mood — quantifying the expressions of unease erupting in protests and political swings. They convey levels of economic stress sharply felt but until now hard to measure.
Read the full article at this link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/19/us/census-measures-those-not-quite-in-poverty-but-struggling.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Most of Unemployed Now Without Benefits
WASHINGTON - The jobs crisis has left so many people out of work for so long that most of America's unemployed are no longer receiving unemployment benefits.
Early last year, 75 percent were receiving checks. The figure is now 48 percent — a shift that points to a growing crisis of long-term unemployment. Nearly one-third of America's 14 million unemployed have had no job for a year or more.
Congress is expected to decide by year's end whether to continue providing emergency unemployment benefits for up to 99 weeks in the hardest-hit states. If the emergency benefits expire, the proportion of the unemployed receiving aid would fall further.
The ranks of the poor would also rise. The Census Bureau says unemployment benefits kept 3.2 million people from slipping into poverty last year. It defines poverty as annual income below $22,314 for a family of four.
Yet for a growing share of the unemployed, a vote in Congress to extend the benefits to 99 weeks is irrelevant. They've had no job for more than 99 weeks. They're no longer eligible for benefits.
Get the full article at this link:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/45174237
19 Stats About Poverty That Will Astound You
#1 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the percentage of "very poor" rose in 300 out of the 360 largest metropolitan areas during 2010.
#2 Last year, 2.6 million more Americans descended into poverty. That was the largest increase that we have seen since the U.S. government began keeping statistics on this back in 1959.
#3 It isn't just the ranks of the "very poor" that are rising. The number of those just considered to be "poor" is rapidly increasing as well. Back in the year 2000, 11.3% of all Americans were living in poverty. Today, 15.1% of all Americans are living in poverty.
#4 The poverty rate for children living in the United States increased to 22% in 2010.
#5 There are 314 counties in the United States where at least 30% of the children are facing food insecurity.
#6 In Washington D.C., the "child food insecurity rate" is 32.3%.
#7 More than 20 million U.S. children rely on school meal programs to keep from going hungry.
#8 One out of every six elderly Americans now lives below the federal poverty line.
#9 Today, there are over 45 million Americans on food stamps.
#10 According to the Wall Street Journal, nearly 15 percent of all Americans are now on food stamps.
#11 In 2010, 42 percent of all single mothers in the United States were on food stamps.
#12 The number of Americans on food stamps has increased 74% since 2007.
#13 We are told that the economy is recovering, but the number of Americans on food stamps has grown by another 8 percent over the past year.
#14 Right now, one out of every four American children is on food stamps.
#15 It is being projected that approximately 50 percent of all U.S. children will be on food stamps at some point in their lives before they reach the age of 18.
#16 More than 50 million Americans are now on Medicaid. Back in 1965, only one out of every 50 Americans was on Medicaid. Today, approximately one out of every 6 Americans is on Medicaid.
#17 One out of every six Americans is now enrolled in at least one government anti-poverty program.
#18 The number of Americans that are going to food pantries and soup kitchens has increased by 46% since 2006.
#19 It is estimated that up to half a million children may currently be homeless in the United States.
Read the full article with more information at the following link:
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/extreme-poverty-is-now-at-record-levels-19-statistics-about-the-poor-that-will-absolutely-astound-you
#2 Last year, 2.6 million more Americans descended into poverty. That was the largest increase that we have seen since the U.S. government began keeping statistics on this back in 1959.
#3 It isn't just the ranks of the "very poor" that are rising. The number of those just considered to be "poor" is rapidly increasing as well. Back in the year 2000, 11.3% of all Americans were living in poverty. Today, 15.1% of all Americans are living in poverty.
#4 The poverty rate for children living in the United States increased to 22% in 2010.
#5 There are 314 counties in the United States where at least 30% of the children are facing food insecurity.
#6 In Washington D.C., the "child food insecurity rate" is 32.3%.
#7 More than 20 million U.S. children rely on school meal programs to keep from going hungry.
#8 One out of every six elderly Americans now lives below the federal poverty line.
#9 Today, there are over 45 million Americans on food stamps.
#10 According to the Wall Street Journal, nearly 15 percent of all Americans are now on food stamps.
#11 In 2010, 42 percent of all single mothers in the United States were on food stamps.
#12 The number of Americans on food stamps has increased 74% since 2007.
#13 We are told that the economy is recovering, but the number of Americans on food stamps has grown by another 8 percent over the past year.
#14 Right now, one out of every four American children is on food stamps.
#15 It is being projected that approximately 50 percent of all U.S. children will be on food stamps at some point in their lives before they reach the age of 18.
#16 More than 50 million Americans are now on Medicaid. Back in 1965, only one out of every 50 Americans was on Medicaid. Today, approximately one out of every 6 Americans is on Medicaid.
#17 One out of every six Americans is now enrolled in at least one government anti-poverty program.
#18 The number of Americans that are going to food pantries and soup kitchens has increased by 46% since 2006.
#19 It is estimated that up to half a million children may currently be homeless in the United States.
Read the full article with more information at the following link:
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/extreme-poverty-is-now-at-record-levels-19-statistics-about-the-poor-that-will-absolutely-astound-you
Friday, November 4, 2011
Wanna Eat? Take the Mark of the Beast!
I try not to get too far off base into conspiracy land here on this blog. We have enough very real problems dealing with poverty, without worrying about thinking that everyone really is out to get us, literally. But many folks do turn to God and religion in their time of need, so in that sense, I thought that perhaps readers here might be interested in the darker religious tones of this piece. But even if you don't really want to get too far off base, and would prefer to stay grounded, dealing more in tangibles than prophecy, you should still find this information interesting, and alarming.
If you doubt that this is happening, or worse yet, think it's actually a good idea, I suggest you read the material in the few links I will provide below.
Here is what the video creator had to say in his synopsis:
Marking the 'Beasts'
Why drug testing of welfare recipients is a bad idea
Prison Labor Re-Education Camps For Welfare Recipients?
Recipients of unemployment benefits to work again cleaning subways
Poverty Level at Highest Point Ever Recorded
Do you qualify for foodstamps?
Will you submit? Will you take the Mark of the Beast?
If you doubt that this is happening, or worse yet, think it's actually a good idea, I suggest you read the material in the few links I will provide below.
Here is what the video creator had to say in his synopsis:
I was sent this video by Courageous Nerds..
Uploaded by CourageousNerdz on Nov 4, 2011
I dare you to go to the WIC website, or the EBT website or the SNAP/Food stamp website or the Grocery Manufacturers of america,the food and drug admins, etc. etc. Go to there search field browser and type in RFID,or biometric and WATCH what pops up. I also have Government Links to show the validity of this video.
Go Google this entire sentence..... "Planned Nationwide Usage of the biometric information sharing capability by fiscal year 2009-2013" As well as these below.
-Go Google "The human robot operating system" PDF (Super Smoking Gun Proof)
Go to FMI Dot Org. Type 2011 RFID in the search field
Go to www.fns.usda.gov/snap/ebt/ AND TYPE IN 2011 BIOMETRIC OR RFID
Go to youtube and type in "Biometric ID Cards Replace Cash mark of the beast"
Go to youtube and type in
" louisana bans cash"
Go Google "Biometrics dot gov Fingerprint recognition"
I have much more Smokiing gun proof but I'll reveal it later. I have other videos to make .
Marking the 'Beasts'
Why drug testing of welfare recipients is a bad idea
Prison Labor Re-Education Camps For Welfare Recipients?
Recipients of unemployment benefits to work again cleaning subways
Poverty Level at Highest Point Ever Recorded
Do you qualify for foodstamps?
Will you submit? Will you take the Mark of the Beast?
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Poverty Level at Highest Point Ever Recorded
More people are living in poverty today than at any point ever recorded in the 54 years since statistics first started to be recorded. 46.2 million Americans, 1 in 6 of us, must manage to survive on less then $10,830 a year or a measly $22,050 for a family of four. The poverty rate spiked to 15.1% in 2010 the Census Bureau reported on Tuesday, with a whopping 2.6 million people slipping below the threshold.
What is the poverty line? Check out this video from a few years ago, when things were actually a lot better...
Median household incomes are also in steep decline, falling 2.3% between 2009 and 2010 to $49,400 which is a 7% slip from the 1999 peak of $53,252.
45.3% of Americans between the ages of 25-34 now live below the poverty line, forcing them to move back home with parents or into communal living situations.
Timothy Smeeding, director of the Institute for Research and Poverty at the University of Wisconsin, Madison says:
What is the poverty line? Check out this video from a few years ago, when things were actually a lot better...
Median household incomes are also in steep decline, falling 2.3% between 2009 and 2010 to $49,400 which is a 7% slip from the 1999 peak of $53,252.
45.3% of Americans between the ages of 25-34 now live below the poverty line, forcing them to move back home with parents or into communal living situations.
Timothy Smeeding, director of the Institute for Research and Poverty at the University of Wisconsin, Madison says:
“We’re risking a new underclass. Young, less educated adults, mainly men, can’t support their children and form stable families because they are jobless.”
Sunday, August 28, 2011
Single Dad Forced to Abandon 11-Year Old as Banks Foreclose
Eleven-year-old Sebastian Cross woke up July 18 to find his dad gone.
Left behind were two notes.
In the first, his father, Steven Alexander Cross, said there were no jobs for architects in the current economy. It went on to say their Lakeville home was in foreclosure and they would be evicted the following week.
Cross instructed Sebastian in the note to take his PlayStation and go to a neighbor's house.
The second note asks the neighbors to take care of his son.
"If this paper is wet, it's because I am crying so bad," the father wrote to the boy. "You know your dad loves you more than anything."
Authorities have issued an arrest warrant for Cross, 60, who was charged this month with a gross misdemeanor of child neglect, according to a Dakota County criminal complaint.
Sebastian is in the custody of Dakota County Child Protection, said County Attorney James Backstrom. He is living with a foster family but soon will be placed permanently with a relative.
"For a parent to abandon a child under these circumstances - it is both unusual and disturbing," Backstrom said.
Cross' last known whereabouts were in California, but officials have been unable to locate him.
On Thursday, his two-story home was vacant. Foreclosure signs on the front door said the house is under new ownership and told where to go to collect any items left behind. A bank bought the home Jan. 25 for $336,925, according to county records.
Read more: http://www.twincities.com/news/ci_18760371?source=rss
Unusual and disturbing there eh Mr. Lawyer who apparently has a fuckin' job. Better get used to this trend folks. And here they are going to charge this man with a crime, as if he wanted to lose his house and his son. This country makes me fekkin sick.
Monday, August 22, 2011
Oompa Loompa's Revolt!
Hershey/Palmyra, PA - Hundreds of foreign student-workers walked off the job and marched on downtown Hershey, Pennsylvania protesting low wages and poor working conditions at a packing warehouse for the candy giant Hershey Company. Protests were also planned for Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. The student guest-workers are here as part of a State Department program that brings hundreds of thousands of foreigners stateside each year to learn about American life.
Well, it appears the program is successful.
Using a special J-1 work-travel visa the students came to America and were contracted to the Palmyra plant by a California-based company called the Council for Educational Travel, USA (CETUSA). According to one article, the students...
Welcome to America kids.
Now I would be the first to agree that wages in America have become absurdly unfair. Even at a dollar or so per hour above minimum wage, Americans lucky enough to have a full-time job will not earn enough to live on in most parts of the country. That is indeed a serious problem, for Americans. But for temporary foreign student-workers to be complaining about it seems absurd when Americans themselves aren't able to make ends meet. Shouldn't we be the ones protesting? Aren't these students lucky to even be paid anything at all when so many Americans are usually not paid anything for what amounts to an internship? Aren't the Oompa-Loompa's lucky to be out of Loompaland?
The New York Times article on this story gives this account of one student who participated in the program...
Why would a they assume that they would be paid enough to not only pay for their entire trip and all of their living expenses, but also to pay for their future education? It seems that some of these students thought they hit the jackpot with a free ride in the land of milk and honey and were bound for streets of gold, but didn't have to bother reading a contract or to work out some basic arithmetic. It also seems that people around the world have a serious misconception of what life is really like in America. What exactly did they think they were being promised, a six-figure salary, free English classes, and a chauffeur to take them from theme park to theme park?
At $8.35 an hour, a student would have to work about 35 hours per week (before deductions) for 12 weeks (a summer vacation) in order to repay the $3,500 amount that Ms. Ozer invested. Seems like a quite generous offer really, to be promised paid employment in order to help offset the costs of their visit, at a time when tens of millions of willing and able Americans aren't able to find any regular work at all. Even after a deduction for $400 per month rent, far less than what many Americans pay for rent, she complains about being paid a bit less then $200 a week in "take home" pay. Again, welcome to America. There are many folks who are glad to take home even $50 a week after rent. And it seems that if she is actually netting that much pay, she is not forced to pay the deductions that American workers must pay. Working 40 hours a week, an American worker making $8.35 an hour will only take home about $230 or so per week, at most, BEFORE rent.
Bruises? Oh nose! Try working for a dollar less per hour in some gas station kwiki-mart dealing with asshole customers all day and running a very high risk of getting shot over the $200 in your cash register. Rights? What rights? You are not entitled to anything here in America, as a foreigner, yet you are enjoying as much rights as any American, and even more. You were guaranteed a job. A luxury most Americans do NOT have. Cultural exchange? Well buddy, take a big whiff of life in America. Work, go home, eat some ramen, watch some American Idol, sleep for a few hours, and do it all over again. That is life in America today. If you want more than that, then on your day off go ahead and visit a museum, or head on down do the Hershey fun park, have a candy bar and a slice of pizza. There is your cultural exchange. Granted, factory work is not the most fulfilling work. It is labor intensive and repetitive, but one could do a lot worse than to work in an American factory that has a rather high safety standard and labor protection laws compared to the rest of the world. Did you really think you were being promised an executive suite in Manhattan?
Here is another excerpt from the NYT article...
Well sweetheart, if you can't do the job, then why should they pay you? They need a job done, that is the bottom line. If you can't do it, you're on your own. They have no obligation to you of any sort. Take it up with the Sate Department if you don't like the job you were handed on a silver platter. In the meantime, they need these boxes packed and shipped. That's the job. Don't like it? Start putting out job applications elsewhere just like every other American and a long line of foreigners. And cameras? Lol. If you have a problem with cameras America is not the country for you.
One more excerpt form the NYT article quoting a student-worker...
Wow, just wow. And folks have the nerve to call Americans soft? This guy lifts some boxes for a few hours and can't lift a pen? Hit the gym buddy.
Now all things considered here, I never read any of the contracts or promotional material recruiting these students. It's quite possible that they were coerced to some extent. I would not doubt that in the least in fact, that they were led to believe that they were being offered something more than they were getting, without actually being lied to "technically" for the benefit of an American company or two. But hey, that's lesson number one in America. Read the fine print. And if it isn't in the print at all, you damn well better ask and nail someone down to an answer before you commit. Never assume anything.
It also sounds too though, like all these medical students and so forth from foreign lands have a certain "silver spoon" syndrome that many American students also have. That somehow manual labor is beneath them. Or that working a full time job interferes with "more important" things.
So really, at the end of this article I am of mixed feelings. On the one hand, these students should feel lucky at all to be given any full-time job at all, even one above minimum wage on top of that, in order to offset their costs of living in America for a time under genuinely American conditions. On the other hand, we can see clearly that American corporations are exploiting foreign labor while shunning domestic labor. At the same time we must ask ourselves, how far have we fallen that people from third-world nations and totalitarian states find common life in America to be wretched?
End all be all, I think that these students were shocked to find that America is not what we have been billed to be around the world for so many years. We are rapidly degenerating into a third world nation, as predicted now for many years, and this story makes the prediction now apparently true. There is a very wide income disparity, workers are treated more unfairly than ever in relation to their pay versus labor. It is no exaggeration to say that we are being paid a slave-wage, or worse. At least slaves are given enough to subsist on. Today, so many American workers labor away only to find themselves sinking deeper and deeper into debt, as if there were a vampire draining away their life's toil, reducing them to less than slaves. Human beings of negative value.
A sad state of affairs. Did we really need some foreign students to wake us up to this new American reality?
Sourced and related articles:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/18/us/18immig.html?pagewanted=all
http://wsws.org/articles/2011/aug2011/hers-a22.shtml
http://rt.com/usa/news/students-protest-exchange-hersheys/
Well, it appears the program is successful.
Using a special J-1 work-travel visa the students came to America and were contracted to the Palmyra plant by a California-based company called the Council for Educational Travel, USA (CETUSA). According to one article, the students...
...were made to do heavy lifting and meet a strenuous production schedule, some of them working night shift. They were paid only $8.35 an hour, and large portions of their paychecks were automatically deducted for program fees and rent. Students said after the deductions they were not earning enough to recoup the cost of the program and to make ends meet.
Welcome to America kids.
The New York Times article on this story gives this account of one student who participated in the program...
Harika Duygu Ozer, 19, a second-year medical student from a university in Istanbul, said she had heard from friends that the summer exchange program would be fun and that she would earn enough money to pay for her medical school tuition.
“I said, ‘Why not?’ This is America,” Ms. Ozer said. (emphasized)
When she was offered a contract for a job at a plant with Hershey’s chocolates, she said, she was excited. “We have all seen Charlie’s chocolate factory,” she said. “We thought, ‘This is good.’ ”
Like many other students, Ms. Ozer said she invested about $3,500, which included the program costs, to obtain the J-1 visa and travel to the United States.
Why would a they assume that they would be paid enough to not only pay for their entire trip and all of their living expenses, but also to pay for their future education? It seems that some of these students thought they hit the jackpot with a free ride in the land of milk and honey and were bound for streets of gold, but didn't have to bother reading a contract or to work out some basic arithmetic. It also seems that people around the world have a serious misconception of what life is really like in America. What exactly did they think they were being promised, a six-figure salary, free English classes, and a chauffeur to take them from theme park to theme park?
At $8.35 an hour, a student would have to work about 35 hours per week (before deductions) for 12 weeks (a summer vacation) in order to repay the $3,500 amount that Ms. Ozer invested. Seems like a quite generous offer really, to be promised paid employment in order to help offset the costs of their visit, at a time when tens of millions of willing and able Americans aren't able to find any regular work at all. Even after a deduction for $400 per month rent, far less than what many Americans pay for rent, she complains about being paid a bit less then $200 a week in "take home" pay. Again, welcome to America. There are many folks who are glad to take home even $50 a week after rent. And it seems that if she is actually netting that much pay, she is not forced to pay the deductions that American workers must pay. Working 40 hours a week, an American worker making $8.35 an hour will only take home about $230 or so per week, at most, BEFORE rent.
“We want to own our rights,” 20-year-old Chinese student Zhao Huijiao told the New York Times. “There is no cultural exchange, none, none… It is just work, work faster, work.” She and three other Chinese students held out their arms to display bruises from moving heavy boxes.
Bruises? Oh nose! Try working for a dollar less per hour in some gas station kwiki-mart dealing with asshole customers all day and running a very high risk of getting shot over the $200 in your cash register. Rights? What rights? You are not entitled to anything here in America, as a foreigner, yet you are enjoying as much rights as any American, and even more. You were guaranteed a job. A luxury most Americans do NOT have. Cultural exchange? Well buddy, take a big whiff of life in America. Work, go home, eat some ramen, watch some American Idol, sleep for a few hours, and do it all over again. That is life in America today. If you want more than that, then on your day off go ahead and visit a museum, or head on down do the Hershey fun park, have a candy bar and a slice of pizza. There is your cultural exchange. Granted, factory work is not the most fulfilling work. It is labor intensive and repetitive, but one could do a lot worse than to work in an American factory that has a rather high safety standard and labor protection laws compared to the rest of the world. Did you really think you were being promised an executive suite in Manhattan?
Here is another excerpt from the NYT article...
“You stand for the entire eight hours,” she said. “It is the worst thing for your fingers and hands and your back; you are standing at an angle.”
At one of the sites where she worked, she said, cameras were trained on her, and supervisors told her that if she did not want to maintain the pace of work, she should leave.
Well sweetheart, if you can't do the job, then why should they pay you? They need a job done, that is the bottom line. If you can't do it, you're on your own. They have no obligation to you of any sort. Take it up with the Sate Department if you don't like the job you were handed on a silver platter. In the meantime, they need these boxes packed and shipped. That's the job. Don't like it? Start putting out job applications elsewhere just like every other American and a long line of foreigners. And cameras? Lol. If you have a problem with cameras America is not the country for you.
One more excerpt form the NYT article quoting a student-worker...
Godwin Efobi, 26, a third-year medical student from Nigeria who is studying at a university in Ukraine, said his job was moving boxes. “Since I came here, I have a permanent ache in my back,” Mr. Efobi said. “Holding a pen is now a big task for me; my muscles ache.”
Wow, just wow. And folks have the nerve to call Americans soft? This guy lifts some boxes for a few hours and can't lift a pen? Hit the gym buddy.
Now all things considered here, I never read any of the contracts or promotional material recruiting these students. It's quite possible that they were coerced to some extent. I would not doubt that in the least in fact, that they were led to believe that they were being offered something more than they were getting, without actually being lied to "technically" for the benefit of an American company or two. But hey, that's lesson number one in America. Read the fine print. And if it isn't in the print at all, you damn well better ask and nail someone down to an answer before you commit. Never assume anything.
It also sounds too though, like all these medical students and so forth from foreign lands have a certain "silver spoon" syndrome that many American students also have. That somehow manual labor is beneath them. Or that working a full time job interferes with "more important" things.
So really, at the end of this article I am of mixed feelings. On the one hand, these students should feel lucky at all to be given any full-time job at all, even one above minimum wage on top of that, in order to offset their costs of living in America for a time under genuinely American conditions. On the other hand, we can see clearly that American corporations are exploiting foreign labor while shunning domestic labor. At the same time we must ask ourselves, how far have we fallen that people from third-world nations and totalitarian states find common life in America to be wretched?
End all be all, I think that these students were shocked to find that America is not what we have been billed to be around the world for so many years. We are rapidly degenerating into a third world nation, as predicted now for many years, and this story makes the prediction now apparently true. There is a very wide income disparity, workers are treated more unfairly than ever in relation to their pay versus labor. It is no exaggeration to say that we are being paid a slave-wage, or worse. At least slaves are given enough to subsist on. Today, so many American workers labor away only to find themselves sinking deeper and deeper into debt, as if there were a vampire draining away their life's toil, reducing them to less than slaves. Human beings of negative value.
A sad state of affairs. Did we really need some foreign students to wake us up to this new American reality?
Sourced and related articles:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/18/us/18immig.html?pagewanted=all
http://wsws.org/articles/2011/aug2011/hers-a22.shtml
http://rt.com/usa/news/students-protest-exchange-hersheys/
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Living off the Land in Brooklyn NY
'Game' time in B'klyn
Wildlife poachers
It's a little slice of Alabama in the middle of Brooklyn.
A pack of vagrants was found living in a makeshift camp alongside the Prospect Park lake, where they poached the local wildlife using cruel hunting methods, officials said...
See the full article at this link:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/brooklyn/game_time_in_klyn_pWrqNaSaOP6Vxm8SI14KCO
Tent City, USA (coming to a town near you!)
Urban Foraging, Eat What You Have
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Urban Foraging, Eat What You Have
http://www.king5.com/news/Seattle-woman-who-forages-for-food-127666103.html
Living Well Without a Job and With (Almost) No Money
Not only does “Possum Living” tell you how to live without a job, the book offers plenty of guidance on practical matters, such as buying a home (cheap!), growing and canning food, killing and skinning rabbits, making moonshine, and much more.
Read more: http://www.motherearthnews.com/modern-homesteading/living-well-without-a-job-and-with-almost-no-money.aspx
Monday, August 15, 2011
Tent City, USA
Coming to a town near you!
By my estimation, there is NO reason why people should EVER be homeless, under any circumstances, in the richest, most powerful nation on the planet. If we can't get it right, then what is the ideal we are exporting?
Read more... http://abcnews.go.com/US/jersey-tent-city-houses-70-homeless-people-draw/story?id=14272847
By my estimation, there is NO reason why people should EVER be homeless, under any circumstances, in the richest, most powerful nation on the planet. If we can't get it right, then what is the ideal we are exporting?
New Jersey Tent City Houses 70 Homeless People Who Draw Community Scorn
Marilyn Berenzweig was a successful New York textile designer who loved her work and comfortable lifestyle. For the past year, however, she and her husband have been living in a tent city in the New Jersey woods.
"The weather, the bugs, the dirt; I think it's the dirt that really gets to me," she said. "It's not like you can pop in the shower at the end of the day.
"It's life on a much more primitive level. ... Cooking on a wood stove ... having no running water, no electricity."
Read more... http://abcnews.go.com/US/jersey-tent-city-houses-70-homeless-people-draw/story?id=14272847
Friday, August 5, 2011
Food Stamp Record Up to 45.8 Mil
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Nearly 15% of the U.S. population relied on food stamps in May, according to the United States Department of Agriculture.
The number of Americans using the government's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) -- more commonly referred to as food stamps -- shot to an all-time high of 45.8 million in May, the USDA reported. That's up 12% from a year ago, and 34% higher than two years ago.
The program provides monthly benefits to low-income individuals and families, which they can use at stores that accept SNAP benefits.
To qualify for food stamps, an individual's income can't exceed $1,174 a month or $14,088 a year -- an amount that is 130% of the national poverty level.
full article at link:
http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/04/pf/food_stamps_record_high/index.htm?iid=HP_River
Also check out a video here...
Poverty is Big Business
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Reality Check: Ten Facts About American Family Finances
#1 Only 58 percent of Americans have a job right now.
#2 Only 56 percent of Americans are currently covered by employer-provided health insurance.
#3 The median yearly wage in the United States is $26,261.
#4 The average American household is carrying $75,600 in debt.
#5 Only the top 5 percent of U.S. households have earned enough additional income to match the rise in housing costs since 1975.
#6 At this point, American families are approximately 7.7 trillion dollars poorer than they were back in early 2007.
#7 The poorest 50% of all Americans now own just 2.5% of all the wealth in the United States.
#8 According to one study, approximately 21 percent of all children in the United States were living below the poverty line in 2010.
#9 Today, there are more than 44 million Americans on food stamps, and nearly half of them are children.
#10 According to Newsweek, close to 20 percent of all American men between the ages of 25 and 54 do not have a job at the moment.
Read the article that explains these facts and view inline links at this url:
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/broke-10-facts-about-the-financial-condition-of-american-families-that-will-blow-your-mind
Friday, July 22, 2011
Do you qualify for foodstamps?
I used this helpful tool myself when I lost my job and was having a hard time finding enough food through local foodbanks. Find out if you qualify for "food stamps" or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
http://www.snap-step1.usda.gov/fns/
And DON'T let anyone shame you for it! The truth about where money for food-stamps comes from is a convoluted mess that most people will simply never understand. It is simply easier for the working stiff to blame the victims of failed economic policy, rather than addressing the policy itself. Safer to blame poor people for being poor. But here's the short, short version. Taxpayers do not pay for welfare. Foodstamps are issued and controlled by J.P.Morgan/Chase, not the government. Also keep in mind, that the people complaining the loudest today that you are getting foodstamps, will probably be the same people who need foostamps in a short time if this trend continues.
http://www.snap-step1.usda.gov/fns/
And DON'T let anyone shame you for it! The truth about where money for food-stamps comes from is a convoluted mess that most people will simply never understand. It is simply easier for the working stiff to blame the victims of failed economic policy, rather than addressing the policy itself. Safer to blame poor people for being poor. But here's the short, short version. Taxpayers do not pay for welfare. Foodstamps are issued and controlled by J.P.Morgan/Chase, not the government. Also keep in mind, that the people complaining the loudest today that you are getting foodstamps, will probably be the same people who need foostamps in a short time if this trend continues.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
The 7 Most Horrifying Cost Cutting Measures of All-Time
Money is tight, and everyone is cutting costs. But it's all about knowing where to cut; the family will skip the vacation, but doesn't try to save on clothes by turning the neighbor's cats into loincloths.
Unfortunately, when large organizations try to cut costs or figure out new sources of revenue, they tend to take the kitty loincloth approach. We're talking about ...
Story at link:
http://www.cracked.com/article_18884_the-7-most-horrifying-cost-cutting-measures-all-time.html
Why is abortion illegal for men but not women?
Poverty often plays a major role in crimes of all sorts, but so very often in domestic violence crimes. It also plays a deadly serious role in reproduction and family planning issues.
Now before we get off on the wrong foot here, I want to say that clearly the man who is the subject of the news article below was wrong in his actions. You can't go violently attacking people in a civilized society. But having said that, I can empathize with the man, and would like to examine the deeper socio-economic issues behind this news brief...
Man charged with trying to abort his pregnant girlfriend
LIBERTY – A 20-year-old Liberty man has been charged with felony abortion in the second degree and other charges for allegedly punching his 17-year-old pregnant girlfriend in the stomach in an effort to abort the pregnancy.
Travis Mervine was also charged with third-degree assault, fourth-degree criminal mischief, second-degree unlawful imprisonment, criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation, and harassment in the second degree.
The girlfriend called police on May 22 from her mother’s house to report she had been held prisoner by Mervine at his home from May 21 through May 22 and while there, he punched her in the stomach.
Mervine was located and arrested on Lake Street in the Village of Liberty and while police were taking him to court for arraignment, he fled from an officer on foot, while handcuffed.
After a four hour manhunt, Liberty Police, assisted by a Fallsburg Police K-9 unit, State Police and the Sullivan County Sheriff’s Office, he was located at his father’s home in Liberty. He was also charged with felony escape in the second degree.
Mervine was arraigned and remanded to the Sullivan County Jail without bail.
http://www.midhudsonnews.com/News/2011/May/24/Mervine_arr-24May11.htm
Right off the bat I have a problem with this article. I don't know if it is just an error in reporting or not, but why is he being charged with felony abortion if it was only an attempt? We'll leave that technical question alone from here on out though, and focus instead on the deeper issues here.
Clearly we see a young man, trapped by circumstance, desperately thrashing about in vain to keep his freedom. Not only freedom from incarceration after his violent outburst, but to maintain his freedom of choice and his own economic freedom. To that extent, I certainly can empathize with him even if I don't condone his actions. This system of hypocrisy breeds this sort of violence and rebellion.
If a woman wants to terminate a pregnancy, there is nothing the father can do about it. He can not insist that the child be born, cannot sue the woman if she chooses to kill the unborn against his wishes. She does not even have to tell him that she is pregnant or going for an abortion in the first place.
Yet when it serves the purposes of women, children suddenly becomes a "mutual" choice and responsibility. If the man decides he does not want to be father, or simply can't be a father under his current circumstances for any reason, he's shit out of luck. Not only does he have no say in whether or not that child is brought into the world, but then he is also forced to pay for it against his will, quite often literally beyond his financial means to do so even if he wanted to. Other men simply may not want to fill the role of a father, which every child certainly should have. Single parent homes are far from ideal despite what we as a society have been brainwashed to believe. If a man does not want to be a father, then he should not be forced to be. When you do force him, you wind up with situations like this one reported above, maybe worse. Or, more commonly, men who begrudgingly and halfheartedly try to meet "their responsibility" as women and the government become loathed, and even his own children become objects of pain and hatred rather than love and pride.
Of course, there is the tired old excuse that the man should wear a condom if he does not want to be a father. Sorry folks, that shit don't fly with me. Women have far more choices when it comes to birth control, up to and including termination of a pregnancy (or simply insisting that the man wear a condom in the first place.) With rights comes responsibility. Why should the man be responsible for the WOMAN'S CHOICE? It is not a shared responsibility, it is not a mutual decision, it is the woman's choice, plain and simple, as this news article makes abundantly clear. The woman is responsible for her own body, and the man has NO RIGHTS over whether or not "his" child is brought into the world.
Can I sue a woman who transmits some disease to me, knowing that she had a disease, because I chose to not wear a condom? Certainly not. And the same should go the opposite way. A woman should not be able to sue a man financially, for the consequences of the transmission of biological material, which she knew full well the potential consequences of. She could have gone on the pill, patch, shot, used the ring, foam, sponge, spermicide, diaphragm, implant, or female condom, insisted that the man wear a condom or simply elected to not have sex with a man who had no intention of being a father to a child. (Here's a hint ladies, if he didn't put a ring on it, he doesn't wanna be your baby-daddy.) A woman can also choose to abstain when she is most fertile and ovulating, and obviously much more likely to become pregnant. Short of that, the woman can still resort to the morning-after pill, and ultimately it is her choice, the woman's choice alone, whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term.
So long as it is "her body, her choice" then it is also her responsibility. She should have no right whatsoever to insist that a man participate in any way, financially or otherwise, with the rearing of that offspring that was the product of her choice, and her choice alone. Unless of course, we want to make it a truly mutual responsibility, and outlaw abortion without the consent of the father as well. With freedom comes responsibility.
SUPPLEMENTAL:
Technically, in some instances a woman can also be guilty of illegal abortion under NY Penal Code. But basically, those amount to abortions that are done outside of a clinical setting under the care of a sanctioned physician. You will also notice too though, the gender bias applied to such cases. Keep in mind here too, that these laws make no distinction as to the willingness of the female to participate in an abortional act perpetrated by a man. In other words, even if the woman does not want the baby, but the man commits the abortional act on her behalf, he is STILL guilty of a felony.
S 125.40 Abortion in the second degree.
A person is guilty of abortion in the second degree when he commits an
abortional act upon a female, unless such abortional act is justifiable
pursuant to subdivision three of section 125.05.
Abortion in the second degree is a class E felony.
S 125.45 Abortion in the first degree.
A person is guilty of abortion in the first degree when he commits
upon a female pregnant for more than twenty-four weeks an abortional act
which causes the miscarriage of such female, unless such abortional act
is justifiable pursuant to subdivision three of section 125.05.
Abortion in the first degree is a class D felony.
S 125.50 Self-abortion in the second degree.
A female is guilty of self-abortion in the second degree when, being
pregnant, she commits or submits to an abortional act upon herself,
unless such abortional act is justifiable pursuant to subdivision three
of section 125.05.
Self-abortion in the second degree is a class B misdemeanor.
S 125.55 Self-abortion in the first degree.
A female is guilty of self-abortion in the first degree when, being
pregnant for more than twenty-four weeks, she commits or submits to an
abortional act upon herself which causes her miscarriage, unless such
abortional act is justifiable pursuant to subdivision three of section
125.05.
Self-abortion in the first degree is a class A misdemeanor.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
The U.S. is the Most Overworked Developed Nation in the World – When do we Draw the Line?
Using data by the U.S. BLS, the average productivity per American worker has increased 400% since 1950. One way to look at that is that it should only take one-quarter the work hours, or 11 hours per week, to afford the same standard of living as a worker in 1950 (or our standard of living should be 4 times higher). Is that the case? Obviously not.
Someone is profiting, it’s just not the average American worker.
Information at link:
http://20somethingfinance.com/american-hours-worked-productivity-vacation/
Someone is profiting, it’s just not the average American worker.
Information at link:
http://20somethingfinance.com/american-hours-worked-productivity-vacation/
Poverty: The Home Game Edition
Take the challenge. How would you fare if you were in the same position that so many Americans now find themeselves?
Money as Debt
Feel like the walls are closing in on us? Money not going as far as it used to? Well, you're not alone, and you're not imagining things. While we bicker back and forth amongst ourselves about why the economy is fubar, the pure and simple truth is kept hidden from view, just enough, to let the screw job happen while most Americans are none the wiser. It's not the foreign aid, it's not welfare for the poor, it's not the huge military budget. It all comes down to the simple fact that we operate in a debt-based economy. It doesn't matter if you use a credit card or take out a mortgage. Even if you are a cash and carry guy/gal, every single dollar in your pocket represents debt, not value. Sound crazy? Well it's the truth.
Take the next 47 minutes to watch this stunning video. In that time you will learn more about economics than most people learn in a lifetime of study. Economics is not as complex as we are all led to believe. We have all been duped, so don't be surprised if you are a little pissed off to by the time you are done watching and learning.
(The video takes a few seconds to get going, there's a long black screen leading in.)
If anyone would like to own the DVD, including Money as Debt II: Promises unleashed, you can order directly from the film-makers website...
http://www.moneyasdebt.net/
Take the next 47 minutes to watch this stunning video. In that time you will learn more about economics than most people learn in a lifetime of study. Economics is not as complex as we are all led to believe. We have all been duped, so don't be surprised if you are a little pissed off to by the time you are done watching and learning.
(The video takes a few seconds to get going, there's a long black screen leading in.)
If anyone would like to own the DVD, including Money as Debt II: Promises unleashed, you can order directly from the film-makers website...
http://www.moneyasdebt.net/
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Hospital patients are dumped at homeless shelter
Haven for Hope had just opened its men's dorm in April when the first discharged patient showed up.
It was evening at the homeless center and Haven CEO George Block was walking along the sidewalk when he spied a woman getting out of a taxi. She was in a hospital gown and pushing an IV pole, with the intravenous line still attached to her.
“I asked the taxi driver what he was doing,” Block recalled. “He said he had a note saying to drop the woman off at this address. The women's dorms weren't even open yet, so we had no place to put her. We sent her back to the hospital.”
Since then, the practice of “medical dumping” — in which hospitals try to transfer their still-sick homeless patients to homeless shelters or other hospitals — has increased at Haven, officials allege.
Story continues at link:
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Hospital-patients-are-dumped-at-Haven-780290.php
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Why drug testing of welfare recipients is a bad idea
On July 1st, Florida will become the first state to begin mandatory drug-testing of welfare recipients. While at first glance this may seem to be a great idea, really it is an appeal to emotional rhetoric and typical knee-jerk reaction by the public which sells this bill. Under closer scrutiny, the public would see that this is a terrible idea, more bureaucracy, more government control, with no net gain for the public at large or the taxpayer. So let us look at the reasons, point by point, why drug testing of welfare recipients is actually a very bad idea.
Cost effectiveness
It's not. Plain and simple. The biggest reason that people are supporting this new law is that they believe there will be a major savings to the taxpayer by kicking a bunch of people off of welfare. Even if there were a savings, the voter must make an erroneous assumption that any such savings would grant them any tax relief in the first place or that the money would then be spent on “people who really need it.” But more to the point, this program will be enormously expensive and yet another huge burden on the taxpayers. A Congressional committee found that drug-testing government employees, would cost $77,000 for each positive drug test in 1992 dollars. Is it really worth spending somewhere in the neighborhood of a hundred-grand, just to catch one drug user who may be getting twelve-grand a year in benefits?
According to some sources, drug tests may run as high as $75 per test. The average is expected to land around $42 per test. With 100,000 people on the welfare rolls in Florida, you are looking at a cost of $4.2 million to test everyone once a year for the 420. An expense that the very poorest people of the state will be expected to pay up-front, and then be reimbursed later if they pass the drug test. Of course, the cost of the tests are only the tip of the iceberg too, as all of this information will now have to be digested by the welfare bureaucracy. It would probably be conservative to estimate that the true cost might be three times the cost of the actual test itself, when you consider all the different social workers who will have to check and double check the paperwork, meet with recipients, speak with clinics, etcetera. A red-tape nightmare with a very hefty price tag. And for what? Arizona has also considered such a law. They projected they would save a measly $1.7 million by kicking people off of welfare. That is a net loss of $2.5 million to the taxpayer by comparison. And that is of course, if each person were only tested once per year.
Cronyism, Politics for Profit
That net loss by the taxpayer is a gross gain for the drug testing companies. As it turns out, Florida's governor Rick Scott co-founded and owns 70% of Solantic, the company that will be doing the drug-testing on welfare recipients.
False-positives
There is substantial risk that people will test positive for drugs even if they did not take any drugs. A “blank” false-positive, or one that would have come up positive regardless of what the specimen actually contained runs about 5-6%, even if it were distilled water. When you add to that the fact that things like poppy-seed buns, or Mountain Dew can trigger a false-positive, the rate increases to about 15%. Not to mention people who are taking prescription medications. Some sources indicate false-positive rates can run as high as 1 in 2. So there we will see 15-50,000 innocent people kicked off of welfare for using drugs, when in fact they were not drug users at all. A first offense will mean that the applicant can no re-apply for one year. A subsequent failure would bar the applicant from re-applying for another three years.
Will a second test be granted, and at who's expense, to re-test to insure that a false positive was not returned? Double-testing would of course double the cost to $8.4 million. But even granting a second test in an attempt to offset false-positives does not guarantee that innocent people will not by kicked off of welfare, leaving them and their kids to starve in the streets.
You can check out a huge list of substances that will return a false postitive at the link below this quote from AskDocWeb...
Ineffectiveness of drug testing, and substance bias
The truth is, drug-testing is actually a very ineffective way of uncovering substance abuse and addiction, especially when done randomly or sporadically. To even hope to be effective, recipients would have to be tested once a month or more. For a whopping total of $50.4 million a year cost to the taxpayer for the tests alone, and now triple that to guess what it will actually cost to process those results through the bureaucracy of Social Services.
Alcohol abuse is probably the most prevalent substance abuse problem in our society today, but welfare cannot test for that for two reasons. Firstly, because alcohol is not illegal and secondly, because it processes out of the system so quickly, unlike marijuana which can stay in the system for up to 30 days. Even the casual user can have lingering traces in the system for 10-13 days. Which makes pot smokers the real target of this witch-hunt among welfare recipients. Not drunks, and not even crack-heads or heroin junkies or meth freaks, since those substances only take a matter of hours to filter out of the system. So Florida is going to spend all of this money to catch pot-heads, while likely turning addicts toward harder, more dangerous drugs which are not so easily detected.
Even with just the pot-heads though, how effective will the testing be? Pot smokers have been getting around drug tests for years, with various methods, including elixirs that can be purchased at you local head-shop or online. I'm sure there are similar tricks available for any drug user. More complex tests will only cost even more money. So clearly, many people who are on welfare and doing drugs will never be detected despite the many many millions that will be spent searching for them.
Stigmatizing the poor
There is a false notion in our society today that people on welfare are there as a matter of choice. While there are certainly examples of people who lie and abuse the system, those instances are much more rare than we are led to believe. Again we can take drug abuse as an example. The popular notion is that most people who are poor and on welfare are drug addicts who simply don't want to work. The facts do not support this notion however. Before Michigan's drug testing of welfare recipients was struck down as un-Constitutional, they found that only 3% of recipients were using hard drugs such as cocaine or methamphetamine. That rate is about in line with the general population showing clearly that there is no rampant drug abuse among the poor and disenfranchised. Indeed, another study found that 70% of all drug users in the U.S. were between 18-49 and employed full-time.
Now some might say that if they are employed they have the “right” to do drugs. But by that logic, one must assume that their drug use will not affect their job and finances to the point that they might wind up on welfare in the end thanks to their drug abuse. Which then of course brings up the entire moral basis of even having welfare in the first place.
(Here is an excellent short film about the realities of poverty. It is a little dated in the statistics, but you will get the gist of it anyway I'm sure... )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YYG-f3qYE8
Morality
We as a society have seen fit to put money aside to help our fellow countrymen in their time of need. “Blame” is something that can be thrown around all the livelong day, but at the end of the day we still see a person in dire need of assistance for the basic necessities of life, regardless of the reasons why or how they got there, which more often than not is the result of our nation's terminally flawed economic policy, rather than personal choices. Does that need simply disappear because someone is battling with addiction? Or was their drug addiction necessarily the cause of their economic straits in the first place? Certainly not. As we just noted above, the stigma attached to the poor in regards to drug use is false.
Regardless, it is probably the addict who is most in need of assistance, as much as anyone else suffering from some debilitating disease. Should we kick a homeless vet off of welfare because he chose to join the Army and go to Afghanistan where his legs got blown off? Absolutely not. So we see that choices, mistakes, or anything of the sort is actually irrelevant to the moral question of whether or not a drug user should be given welfare benefits. We do in fact, have a moral obligation to help even the most wretched creatures among us, and the most destitute, regardless of how they got there or what their condition is today.
Forcing the hand is illogical
Simply put, you cannot force people to be, or to do what you believe they should be doing or who you think they should be. All too easy to judge someone else without having walked a mile in their moccasins. There is a long list of medical associations who oppose mandatory drug testing and treatment for any number of reasons.
But perhaps the most glaringly obvious reason is that the addict must want to get better. Forcing someone into the streets, starving them, forcing them into a rehab program that they have no interest in is counterproductive and only compounds the addicts justification for their addiction. It will not make them better, it will not help them to become a productive member of society, it will not address the reasons why the addict turned to substance abuse in the first place.
Instead, the end result of forcing the hand will be an increase in criminality as these addicts will only become more desperate than ever. So we can pay to give addicts the basic necessities of life while they try to find their way to their own destiny and hopefully a moment of clarity where they might recover and once again be productive members of society. Or, we can pay to house and feed them in prisons after they have robbed or killed you or someone you love. Keep in mind too, that the U.S. already has the largest prison population in the world, housing a full 25% of the total global prison population.
Constitutionality
Now we come to the very bedrock of what it means to be an American citizen, with the promise of liberty as prescribed by the Founding Fathers in our beloved Constitution. In 2003 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in the case of Marchwinski v. Howard ruled that the state of Michigan's policy for mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients violated our Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure.
Some have argued that if we can be drug-tested at work, then the government has the right to drug-test welfare recipients. Again though, this is an illogical apples and oranges comparison. Aside from my own personal opinion that even employers should not be able to test workers without cause, a private company or employer is not the government. You have a choice to go work somewhere else. You have the choice to boycott the company that drug tests their employees. Granting the government this power over all the people of this country is a very dangerous precedent.
It is important to keep in mind here, that this isn't just about welfare recipients. This is about the balance of power between government intrusion into our own personal lives and liberty. This is about your rights, not just the rights of some pot-head buying Doritos with food stamps. You never know when you might be in need of welfare or some other public assistance of some kind. Indeed, this sentiment is echoed by U.S. District Court Judge Victoria Roberts when she ruled ruled that the state's rationale for testing welfare recipients...
Sound far-fetched? If you had told me ten years ago that the government would be molesting children at airports under the guise of looking for bombs I would have told you that you were insane. And I am the police-state conspiracy nut. You can bet that if this is allowed to stand in Florida, the government will use that precedent to get into your life in ways you never imagined.
In conclusion, it is my humble opinion that rather than finding new and clever ways to fuck over the poor, they need to start finding ways to do more to help the poor. Namely, creating more jobs and better paying jobs. The government needs to take responsibility for their failures, rather than spending even more tax dollars to try to sweep the problems under the carpet. There is no reason why in the richest, most powerful country in the world anyone should want for the most very basic necessities of life, no matter who they are.
For further consideration:
Economic Bill of Rights
Unemployed forced to clean subways
Prison labor re-education camps for welfare recipients
Cost effectiveness
It's not. Plain and simple. The biggest reason that people are supporting this new law is that they believe there will be a major savings to the taxpayer by kicking a bunch of people off of welfare. Even if there were a savings, the voter must make an erroneous assumption that any such savings would grant them any tax relief in the first place or that the money would then be spent on “people who really need it.” But more to the point, this program will be enormously expensive and yet another huge burden on the taxpayers. A Congressional committee found that drug-testing government employees, would cost $77,000 for each positive drug test in 1992 dollars. Is it really worth spending somewhere in the neighborhood of a hundred-grand, just to catch one drug user who may be getting twelve-grand a year in benefits?
According to some sources, drug tests may run as high as $75 per test. The average is expected to land around $42 per test. With 100,000 people on the welfare rolls in Florida, you are looking at a cost of $4.2 million to test everyone once a year for the 420. An expense that the very poorest people of the state will be expected to pay up-front, and then be reimbursed later if they pass the drug test. Of course, the cost of the tests are only the tip of the iceberg too, as all of this information will now have to be digested by the welfare bureaucracy. It would probably be conservative to estimate that the true cost might be three times the cost of the actual test itself, when you consider all the different social workers who will have to check and double check the paperwork, meet with recipients, speak with clinics, etcetera. A red-tape nightmare with a very hefty price tag. And for what? Arizona has also considered such a law. They projected they would save a measly $1.7 million by kicking people off of welfare. That is a net loss of $2.5 million to the taxpayer by comparison. And that is of course, if each person were only tested once per year.
Cronyism, Politics for Profit
That net loss by the taxpayer is a gross gain for the drug testing companies. As it turns out, Florida's governor Rick Scott co-founded and owns 70% of Solantic, the company that will be doing the drug-testing on welfare recipients.
False-positives
There is substantial risk that people will test positive for drugs even if they did not take any drugs. A “blank” false-positive, or one that would have come up positive regardless of what the specimen actually contained runs about 5-6%, even if it were distilled water. When you add to that the fact that things like poppy-seed buns, or Mountain Dew can trigger a false-positive, the rate increases to about 15%. Not to mention people who are taking prescription medications. Some sources indicate false-positive rates can run as high as 1 in 2. So there we will see 15-50,000 innocent people kicked off of welfare for using drugs, when in fact they were not drug users at all. A first offense will mean that the applicant can no re-apply for one year. A subsequent failure would bar the applicant from re-applying for another three years.
Will a second test be granted, and at who's expense, to re-test to insure that a false positive was not returned? Double-testing would of course double the cost to $8.4 million. But even granting a second test in an attempt to offset false-positives does not guarantee that innocent people will not by kicked off of welfare, leaving them and their kids to starve in the streets.
You can check out a huge list of substances that will return a false postitive at the link below this quote from AskDocWeb...
What is a false positive? It is a test result that is returned when a substance tests positive for another compound. It is a case of mistaken identity. For example if you eat a couple poppy seed cakes before testing, you can get a positive result for opiates.
The chances of you getting a false positive depends on the quality of the laboratory that does the testing. There seems to be about 1,200 of these labs in the United States currently testing for drugs. Less than a 100 of these meet federal standards and most of the individual states do not regulate drug test labs. The number of false positives returned range from 4% to over 50%, depending on the lab.
A concern here is that, if your company tests for drug usage, they are probably not required to use a certified drug testing lab, which means you have a greater chance of getting a false positive.
http://www.askdocweb.com/falsepositives.html
Ineffectiveness of drug testing, and substance bias
The truth is, drug-testing is actually a very ineffective way of uncovering substance abuse and addiction, especially when done randomly or sporadically. To even hope to be effective, recipients would have to be tested once a month or more. For a whopping total of $50.4 million a year cost to the taxpayer for the tests alone, and now triple that to guess what it will actually cost to process those results through the bureaucracy of Social Services.
Alcohol abuse is probably the most prevalent substance abuse problem in our society today, but welfare cannot test for that for two reasons. Firstly, because alcohol is not illegal and secondly, because it processes out of the system so quickly, unlike marijuana which can stay in the system for up to 30 days. Even the casual user can have lingering traces in the system for 10-13 days. Which makes pot smokers the real target of this witch-hunt among welfare recipients. Not drunks, and not even crack-heads or heroin junkies or meth freaks, since those substances only take a matter of hours to filter out of the system. So Florida is going to spend all of this money to catch pot-heads, while likely turning addicts toward harder, more dangerous drugs which are not so easily detected.
Even with just the pot-heads though, how effective will the testing be? Pot smokers have been getting around drug tests for years, with various methods, including elixirs that can be purchased at you local head-shop or online. I'm sure there are similar tricks available for any drug user. More complex tests will only cost even more money. So clearly, many people who are on welfare and doing drugs will never be detected despite the many many millions that will be spent searching for them.
Stigmatizing the poor
There is a false notion in our society today that people on welfare are there as a matter of choice. While there are certainly examples of people who lie and abuse the system, those instances are much more rare than we are led to believe. Again we can take drug abuse as an example. The popular notion is that most people who are poor and on welfare are drug addicts who simply don't want to work. The facts do not support this notion however. Before Michigan's drug testing of welfare recipients was struck down as un-Constitutional, they found that only 3% of recipients were using hard drugs such as cocaine or methamphetamine. That rate is about in line with the general population showing clearly that there is no rampant drug abuse among the poor and disenfranchised. Indeed, another study found that 70% of all drug users in the U.S. were between 18-49 and employed full-time.
Now some might say that if they are employed they have the “right” to do drugs. But by that logic, one must assume that their drug use will not affect their job and finances to the point that they might wind up on welfare in the end thanks to their drug abuse. Which then of course brings up the entire moral basis of even having welfare in the first place.
(Here is an excellent short film about the realities of poverty. It is a little dated in the statistics, but you will get the gist of it anyway I'm sure... )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YYG-f3qYE8
Morality
We as a society have seen fit to put money aside to help our fellow countrymen in their time of need. “Blame” is something that can be thrown around all the livelong day, but at the end of the day we still see a person in dire need of assistance for the basic necessities of life, regardless of the reasons why or how they got there, which more often than not is the result of our nation's terminally flawed economic policy, rather than personal choices. Does that need simply disappear because someone is battling with addiction? Or was their drug addiction necessarily the cause of their economic straits in the first place? Certainly not. As we just noted above, the stigma attached to the poor in regards to drug use is false.
Regardless, it is probably the addict who is most in need of assistance, as much as anyone else suffering from some debilitating disease. Should we kick a homeless vet off of welfare because he chose to join the Army and go to Afghanistan where his legs got blown off? Absolutely not. So we see that choices, mistakes, or anything of the sort is actually irrelevant to the moral question of whether or not a drug user should be given welfare benefits. We do in fact, have a moral obligation to help even the most wretched creatures among us, and the most destitute, regardless of how they got there or what their condition is today.
Forcing the hand is illogical
Simply put, you cannot force people to be, or to do what you believe they should be doing or who you think they should be. All too easy to judge someone else without having walked a mile in their moccasins. There is a long list of medical associations who oppose mandatory drug testing and treatment for any number of reasons.
American Public Health Association, National Association of Social
Workers, Inc., National Association of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse
Counselors, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, National
Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, Association of Maternal and
Child Health Programs, National Health Law Project, National Association
on Alcohol, Drugs and Disability, Inc., National Advocates for Pregnant
Women, National Black Women’s Health Project, Legal Action Center,
National Welfare Rights Union, Youth Law Center, Juvenile Law Center,
National Coalition for Child Protection Reform.
http://www.aclu.org/files/FilesPDFs/marchwinskiamicusbrief1_22_01.pdf
But perhaps the most glaringly obvious reason is that the addict must want to get better. Forcing someone into the streets, starving them, forcing them into a rehab program that they have no interest in is counterproductive and only compounds the addicts justification for their addiction. It will not make them better, it will not help them to become a productive member of society, it will not address the reasons why the addict turned to substance abuse in the first place.
Instead, the end result of forcing the hand will be an increase in criminality as these addicts will only become more desperate than ever. So we can pay to give addicts the basic necessities of life while they try to find their way to their own destiny and hopefully a moment of clarity where they might recover and once again be productive members of society. Or, we can pay to house and feed them in prisons after they have robbed or killed you or someone you love. Keep in mind too, that the U.S. already has the largest prison population in the world, housing a full 25% of the total global prison population.
Constitutionality
Now we come to the very bedrock of what it means to be an American citizen, with the promise of liberty as prescribed by the Founding Fathers in our beloved Constitution. In 2003 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in the case of Marchwinski v. Howard ruled that the state of Michigan's policy for mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients violated our Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure.
Some have argued that if we can be drug-tested at work, then the government has the right to drug-test welfare recipients. Again though, this is an illogical apples and oranges comparison. Aside from my own personal opinion that even employers should not be able to test workers without cause, a private company or employer is not the government. You have a choice to go work somewhere else. You have the choice to boycott the company that drug tests their employees. Granting the government this power over all the people of this country is a very dangerous precedent.
It is important to keep in mind here, that this isn't just about welfare recipients. This is about the balance of power between government intrusion into our own personal lives and liberty. This is about your rights, not just the rights of some pot-head buying Doritos with food stamps. You never know when you might be in need of welfare or some other public assistance of some kind. Indeed, this sentiment is echoed by U.S. District Court Judge Victoria Roberts when she ruled ruled that the state's rationale for testing welfare recipients...
“...could be used for testing the parents of all children who received Medicaid, State Emergency Relief, educational grants or loans, public education or any other benefit from that State.”The ACLU adds...
Indeed, any of the justifications put forth to subject welfare recipients to random drug testing would also by logical extension apply to the entirety of our population that receives some public benefit and/or that is a parent. It is clear that our constitution – and common sense – would object to the random drug testing of this large group of people, making the drug testing of an equally absurd category of people – welfare recipients – unconstitutional as well.We can even take it a step further and see that the government might use such a precedent to shove us down a slippery slope where you would have to pay for and submit to a drug test for any transaction at the DMV, or any time you are arrested, ticketed, even questioned by police. And then how long before it gets to the point where the government begins drawing blood from whoever they please, and profiling your DNA? How long then before you are forced to be implanted with a government chip that tracks your every movement and every word you say?
Sound far-fetched? If you had told me ten years ago that the government would be molesting children at airports under the guise of looking for bombs I would have told you that you were insane. And I am the police-state conspiracy nut. You can bet that if this is allowed to stand in Florida, the government will use that precedent to get into your life in ways you never imagined.
In conclusion, it is my humble opinion that rather than finding new and clever ways to fuck over the poor, they need to start finding ways to do more to help the poor. Namely, creating more jobs and better paying jobs. The government needs to take responsibility for their failures, rather than spending even more tax dollars to try to sweep the problems under the carpet. There is no reason why in the richest, most powerful country in the world anyone should want for the most very basic necessities of life, no matter who they are.
“There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”
-James Madison
"What good fortune for governments that the people do not think." -Adolf Hitler
For further consideration:
Economic Bill of Rights
Unemployed forced to clean subways
Prison labor re-education camps for welfare recipients
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)