In this weeks session I learned about poverty being effected by the neighborhoods that children are raised in. The children living in metropolitan( rural areas) are more likely to be poor than a children in a suburban area. More than likely these households ran by a woman, a single parent, African American or Hispanics. Areas of concentrated poverty are large areas whose poverty rate is more than 40%. This would make the metropolitan area poor. For individuals who live in this area 37.9% have not completed high school, 40% are African Americans, 13.7% have large families and 18.6% were unemployed in 2006.
George Glaster believes that poverty is being effected by the context in a neighborhood of which the child grows up in: ex: neighbors, bankrupt school system, crime, unemployment, no equal opportunity and friends encouraging to do the wrong thing., Therefore he has come up with a new program that allow families with low income to afford housing in suburban areas by creating a certain amount of rental properties in the middle class area. So that the children can have a different school environment and better influences hoping to better the way that they are raised decreasing the chances of them being in poverty as a adult.
Do I believe that this will work. Yes and No . There are some children who will take into account that they are in a better environment and better themselves but then they are some who will not have the same advantages of the suburban area kids and more than likely be picked on and not fit in. This could let to bad behaviors or doing poor in school. Therefore leading to poverty.
6 comments:
This is true that some children will be left out in the social standing of our school system seldomly because of the way our society shows us what the rich have and the poor have not. These idealologies are past down through our children by the means of entertainment. Doing a better job at creating an alternative means of education ex: if families have financial issues why not have financial studies classes that show children how to properly handle there money for future usage.
Well I agree that no all the kids will not fit in. Also some kids will be at a social disadvantage due to the mixed crowd. Choosing to implemant that program will require a new type of training in which is geared towards teaching with a new diversified approach.
Nice piece...
One of the most persistent ingredients of poverty is the lack of access to education. There's a difference between being born into poverty and working hard to change the situation through changing ones outlook and environment.
Education is one major antithesis of poverty. You give people access and they rid themselves of poverty. I strongly believe that information technology can be the catalyst to make this happen.
A recent study showed more than 40% of African American males dropping out of high school. These schools have become drop out factories.
Government has a responsibility in alleviating poverty. There is something fundamentally wrong with a government that spends money on kids only after they are behind bars rather than focus on the environment that creates that situation in the first place.
America has more than 2 million people in jail--more than any other country in the world. If people do not go to school, the most likely place that they are going to end up is in person. This creates a vicious circle. Investing in education is the key to getting rid of poverty.
Unfortunately Tristan alot of people take for granted the fact that families have access to or even know about these classes. They are out there. Many churches offer free classes on personal finances even going as far as creating series that focus on such. Again, these families may not have access to those avenues. If you're referring to parents offering these lessons to their kids, it may be that they don't have the knowledge and know how to be financially responsible themslelves. Remember kids learn greatly through observation. If the parents aren't doing it themselves, then they surely won't have the aptitude to share it with their children.
Also let's not negate the affects, not only of entertainment on kids, but also on idealogies and values inherited through parents and other family and friends.
I definitely agree that the means to the end of poverty is through education. Although, the lack of resources in an impoverished area does perpetuate the cycle of poverty, one should always seek to find resources to make their situation better. Being proactive rather than reactive is a better approach to life's toils. With the current increase in federal funding for aid and loans, my only hope is that people will now take advantage to further their education. It is the only weapon we have to fight against this enemy we call POVERTY!
This is very true tristan and darius. What will this program do for children will it actually better them by moving them into a suburban area where they will not generally fit in with the other children. Why not take the money they are using on building these properties that will be affordable and build up the neighborhoods and schools that already exist in rural areas. Your not fixing the problem your just migrating it to a different location.
Post a Comment