We youth at EvC are in Moral Decline

Well, I thought I'd open a new topic regarding Buz's claim that we youth "don't have a clue" as to the moral decline we are in.Buz, care to explain for us?

quote:

---

But of course we are in a moral decline! Morality is subjective, so from some point of view we are in a moral... well, freefall even. You however, from your point of view, just fail to see, and rightly so, how that's bad. After all, one (nondescript) man's moral decline is another woman's / black's / homosexual's / liberal's / etc.'s moral uphill struggle.

​

Anyway, freefall and climbing are just two aspects of the great outdoor sport that life is.

​

Just to reassure you: I'm in your (base)camp.

---

You are correct, of course!I just thought I'd prod Buzsaw to elaborate on what he felt constituted moral decline, and why it is that the youth are to blame.I'd also like to know if, when he was young, the old people around him were saying the same things about his generation. If so, doesn't it occur to him that this generational conflict has probably been happening for thousands of years?[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 08-01-2003]

If suicides are up, it may have a great deal to do with the easy availability of cheap handguns.

quote:

---

Few of these workers are doing much more than dreaming about owning a home.

---

Granted, our situation is different because my husband is soon to have a PhD and (hopefully) a job in a University in the next year or so, but I never thought I would be 35 years old and still renting.Also, because the housing market is so obscenely inflated in this college town we live in, we pay around $900 a month for rent plus utilities for a one-bedroom (plus basement) apartment. I make descent money for the kind of work I do, but it ain't no 1980's wage.A small, small house with no garage, no dining room, one bathroom, dirt floor basement and two small bedrooms, in this town, goes for about a quarter million dollars.We have been slowly saving for a house for years, but as much as we like this area, we are definitely moving away to a cheaper part of the country, which is almost anywhere else, save Manhattan and San Francisco.Anyway, I see how things have gone with my other three siblings, of which I am the youngest.My oldest sister is a young Baby Boomer, so she, even as a graphic artist, rode the gravy train of the late 80's and has owned two houses with her husband as well as a business. They are in an economic crunch right now but are able to ride it out due to their equity and investments and savings.The next sister lives in a house with her husband and three kids. They own it, and bought it after selling their first house out east about 10 years ago. She has the luxury of staying at home with them and not working. She also complains about not having much money and she is still wearing quite a few of the clothes she bought in high school and college. She is kind of a agorophobic freak, so I think she is afraid to go out and work, but they could really use the money as the kids are 15, 14, and 13 and therefore will all be in college at once.My brother just bought his first house a couple of years ago at the age of 37.So, you see the trend in our family; it's gotten harder and harder to afford a house as time has gone by.Reall wages for the middle class have stagnated or gone down while housing prices have continued to rise.My parents were able to purchase a brand new, two-car garage, three bedroom, 1 1/2 bath, diningroom, split level on a large corner lot in the early 60's for $15,000, even though my mother wasn't working and my father was just starting out as a Upjohn drug salesman.

quote:

---

I'm sorry, but I just don't believe that owning a home in America is out of the reach of anyone who does a good job for an employer. I just don't see it happening anywhere around me, and, like I said, I live in about the poorest county in America.

---

If you live in the poorest county in America, property values are pretty low, aren't they?What if you want to live in a place where the schools are really good, so your kids will get a great education, but the homes are out of your price range?What if you can afford to buy a house, but only in the bad sections of town?What about all of those good workers in Flint, MI who's houses were foreclosed on by the bank because they got laid off when the GM plant closed?I do a very good job for my employer. So good that I have gotten regular raises, bonuses, awards and promotions for the last five years. I am paid probably double the industry standard for the work I do, and I get great benefits. Because of where my employer is located, I cannot afford to buy a house here, in the town where I work. Small, starter houses are at least $200,000, and that's just the asking price. Bids are usually tens of thousands of dollars over the asking price.If I were to go to the closest town, which is poorer, crime is higher and the schools are worse, I could expect to pay about $150,000 for a starter house. Of course, We would have to buy another car or buy a bus pass because we would both have to drive to work/school instead of walking or biking as we do now.[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 08-04-2003]

quote:

---

truthlover writes:
I was taught--in public school--that Rome's fall had much to do with the loose morals (I don't remember what that meant to the teacher) of the city of Rome.

​

db: There were other factors, were there not?

---

I was taught that, to make money for trade, the emporers ordered grapes to be grown for wine rather than food crops like grain for bread, so people began to starve and then the peasants revolted.

quote:

---

Divorce hurts kids, and it has increased "dramatically" since the 50's. Many people like it. I think it hurts kids.

---

You know, I really wished my parents would have gotten a divorce, or separated, or something.My childhood home was the most tension-filled, emotionally draining, spirit-killing place I have ever been, and it was all because my parents hated each other, but were also too co-dependent to cut themselves loose from each other.My father wasn't emotionally available for as long as I can remember, so I don't think that having him physically gone would have been all that different. I was mainly just afraid of him and resentful that he didn't seem to give a crap about me or my life in the least.My mother took all of her frustrations and anger and resentment out on us kids through constant emotional and occasional physical abuse.All of this, I'm convinced, is because they were completely miserable in their marriage for a very, very long time. Things are basically the same now between the two of them, except my mother doesn't have the kids to scream at at any more, so she screams at him.It's a sick, sick world they live in, and I can see no benefit whatsoever to any children caught up in it.

quote:

---

No, most of them are drug addicts or alcoholics who don't like the rules in the flop houses that will actually help them. The ones that will help them require them to quit drugs and alcohol and will help them to do it.

---

According to the sources I found, lack of affordable housing and poverty are the main reasons people become homeless:National Coalition for the Homeless Page Not Found - National Coalition for the Homeless

quote:

---

Two trends are largely responsible for the rise in homelessness over the past 20-25 years: a growing shortage of affordable rental housing and a simultaneous increase in poverty.

---

quote:

---

The connection between impoverished workers and homelessness can be seen in homeless shelters, many of which house significant numbers of full-time wage earners. A survey of 27 U.S. cities found that over one in four people in homeless situations are employed, a significant increase from 1998 (U.S. Conference of Mayors, 2000). In a number of cities not surveyed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors - as well as in many states - the percentage is even higher (National Coalition for the Homeless, 1997).

---

quote:

---

In the Institute for Children and Poverty study, 37% of homeless families had their welfare benefits reduced or cut in the last year. More strikingly, in Bucks Country and Philadelphia, PA, and Seattle, WA, more than 50% had their benefits reduced or cut?Among those who lost their benefits, 20% said they became homeless as a direct result. Additionally, a second study of six states found that between 1997 and 1998, 25% of families who had stopped receiving welfare in the last six months doubled-up on housing to save money, and 23% moved because they could not pay rent. (Institute for Children and Poverty, 2001).

​

Moreover, extreme poverty is growing more common for children, especially those in female-headed and working families. This increase can be traced directly to the declining number of children lifted above one-half of the poverty line by government cash assistance for the poor (Children's Defense Fund and the National Coalition for the Homeless, 1998).

​

As a result of loss of benefits, low wages, and unstable employment, many families leaving welfare struggle to get medical care, food, and housing. Many lose health insurance, despite continued Medicaid eligibility: a recent study found that 675,000 people lost health insurance in 1997 as a result of the federal welfare reform legislation, including 400,000 children (Families USA, 1999). Moreover, over 725,000 workers, laid off from their jobs due to the recession this past year, lost their health insurance. (Families USA, 2001).

​

In addition, housing is rarely affordable for families leaving welfare for low wages, yet subsidized housing is so limited that fewer than one in four TANF families nationwide lives in public housing or receives a housing voucher to help them rent a private unit. For most families leaving the rolls, housing subsidies are not an option. In some communities, former welfare families appear to be experiencing homelessness in increasing numbers (Children's Defense Fund and the National Coalition for the Homeless, 1998).

---

quote:

---

Addiction Disorders: The relationship between addiction and homelessness is complex and controversial. While rates of alcohol and drug abuse are disproportionately high among the homeless population, the increase in homelessness over the past two decades cannot be explained by addiction alone. Many people who are addicted to alcohol and drugs never become homeless, but people who are poor and addicted are clearly at increased risk of homelessness. During the 1980s, competition for increasingly scarce low-income housing grew so intense that those with disabilities such as addiction and mental illness were more likely to lose out and find themselves on the streets. The loss of SRO housing, a source of stability for many poor people suffering from addiction and/or mental illness, was a major factor in increased homelessness in many communities.

​

Addiction does increase the risk of displacement for the precariously housed; in the absence of appropriate treatment, it may doom one's chances of getting housing once on the streets. Homeless people often face insurmountable barriers to obtaining health care, including addictive disorder treatment services and recovery supports. The following are among the obstacles to treatment for homeless persons: lack of health insurance; lack of documentation; waiting lists; scheduling difficulties; daily contact requirements; lack of transportation; ineffective treatment methods; lack of supportive services; and cultural insensitivity. An in-depth study of 13 communities across the nation revealed service gaps in every community in at least one stage of the treatment and recovery continuum for homeless people (National Coalition for the Homeless, 1998).

---

There's lots more info at the site...

quote:

---

You are entirely correct that land and property values are pretty low around here. The idea of owning your own home is not so out of reach here as it might be in the bay area, where the house my parents bought for 75k in 1980 is worth over 300,000 now, even though it is a tiny 2-bedroom.

​

I didn't say that people can buy a home wherever they want in this country. I'm not imagining that I'll be owning a penthouse in New York in my lifetime, even if I wanted one.

​

I did say that a person willing to bear some hardships could still own a home in the US. I believe that's true.

---

I don't disagree with you, exactly, but I think my point is being rather lost.Sure, I could have bought a nasty, run-down house on the east side of Detroit next to a crack den as early as a couple of years ago.Of course, my husband and I would have had to dodge the gunfire and probably would have had our car stolen/home broken into and computer, stereo, TV stolen within the first month of living there. We would also have an hour long commute to school/job in the clean, safe city.The point was not that nobody could afford to buy a home somewhere.There's a reason property values are so low on the east side of Detroit. The houses there are shitholes in the middle of a war zone.The point is that to buy a home anywhere within a half hour commute to my job would cost us around $200,000.Since the economy is so crappy, however, I have seen real estate prices start to moderate a bit in town.For example, the lovely, large-for-the-neighborhood single-family home right next door to us went on the market, and their starting price was $375,000. They actually had to lower their price, because there were no takers, which is quite unusual around here.In Pittsburgh, the same property would have been no more than $200,000, even in the fanciest part of town.

Add to your list, Buz:National Coalition for the Homeless Page Not Found - National Coalition for the HomelessDomestic violence (women are forced to leave their homes with nothing in order to save their lives)Low/stagnating wages combined with increased housing costsDevastating illnessDecline in public assistance/safety netLack of low-cost housingMental Illness[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 08-09-2003]

Couldn't have said it better m'self.I like you DrBill.

quote:

---

I talk too much, and it carries over into my writing.

---

Nah, I don't think you are too wordy.There are others here MUCH worse than you in that regard.

quote:

---

I was already wondering yesterday what the original point of all this was.

​

I don't disagree with your point, neither now that you've restated it, nor earlier. I think it was DrBill who said that the "American dream" (my words, I think, not his) is lost, and many people can't own a home anymore.

​

I don't believe that's true. I'm not talking about moving to a hellhole in Detroit. I'm talking about someone saying, "I don't like the way I live. I should be able to have my own home." The person who does that can still accomplish that, slowly but surely, here in the United States, even if they have to start with a minimum wage job.

---

My point is, what if they don't ever get much further than that minimum wage job?

quote:

---

They may not be able to do it in a city, but there are still plenty of nice places where a person could "pursue their dreams."

​

I'm not saying anything more than that.

---

I dunno.When our economy rather relies on the idea that thousands and thousands of people being out of work is equal to "full employment", and safety nets are evaporating left and right, I'm not sure I believe you that everyone can own a home.

quote:

---

For homeless people who cannot afford rent there are federal assistance HUD programs to help out.

---

Except that many of these programs have long, long waiting lists. Read below.National Coalition for the Homeless Page Not Found - National Coalition for the Homeless

quote:

---

Housing assistance can make the difference between stable housing, precarious housing, or no housing at all. However, the demand for assisted housing clearly exceeds the supply: only about one-third of poor renter households receive a housing subsidy from the federal, state, or a local government (Daskal, 1998). The limited level of housing assistance means that most poor families and individuals seeking housing assistance are placed on long waiting lists. From 1996-1998, the time households spent on waiting lists for HUD housing assistance grew dramatically. For the largest public housing authorities, a family's average time on a waiting list rose from 22 to 33 months from 1996 to 1998 - a 50% increase (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 1999). The average waiting period for a Section 8 rental assistance voucher rose from 26 months to 28 months between 1996 and 1998.(4)

​

Excessive waiting lists for public housing mean that people must remain in shelters or inadequate housing arrangements longer. For instance, in the mid-1990s in New York, families stayed in a shelter an average of five months before moving on to permanent housing. Today, the average stay is nearly a year (Santos, 2002). Consequently, there is less shelter space available for other homeless people, who must find shelter elsewhere or live on the streets.

​

A housing trend with a particularly severe impact on homelessness is the loss of single room occupancy (SRO) housing. In the past, SRO housing served to house many poor individuals, including poor persons suffering from mental illness or substance abuse. From 1970 to the mid-1980s, an estimated one million SRO units were demolished (Dolbeare, 1996). The demolition of SRO housing was most notable in large cities: between 1970-1982, New York City lost 87% of its $200 per month or less SRO stock; Chicago experienced the total elimination of cubicle hotels; and by 1985, Los Angeles had lost more than half of its downtown SRO housing (Koegel, et al, 1996). From 1975 to 1988, San Francisco lost 43% of its stock of low-cost residential hotels; from 1970 to 1986, Portland, Oregon lost 59% of its residential hotels; and from 1971 to 1981, Denver lost 64% of its SRO hotels (Wright and Rubin, 1997). Thus the destruction of SRO housing is a major factor in the growth of homelessness in many cities.

​

Finally, it should be noted that the largest federal housing assistance program is the entitlement to deduct mortgage interest from income for tax purposes. In fact, for every one dollar spent on low income housing programs, the federal treasury loses four dollars to housing-related tax expenditures, 75% of which benefit households in the top fifth of income distribution (Dolbeare, 1996). Moreover, in 1994 the top fifth of households received 61% of all federal housing benefits (tax and direct), while the bottom fifth received only 18%. Thus, federal housing policy has not responded to the needs of low-income households, while disproportionately benefitting the wealthiest Americans.

---

quote:

---

Evidently many choose not to have a home. Must be they choose to not interrupt their lifestyle or do things like seeking work.

---

Declining wages, in turn, have put housing out of reach for many workers: in every state, more than the minimum wage is required to afford a one- or two-bedroom apartment at Fair Market Rent.(1) In fact, in the median state a minimum-wage worker would have to work 89 hours each week to afford a two-bedroom apartment at 30% of his or her income, which is the federal definition of affordable housing (National Low Income Housing Coalition, 2001). Currently, 5 million rental households have "worst case housing needs," which means that they pay more than half their incomes for rent, living in severely substandard housing, or both. The primary source of income for 80% of these households is earnings from jobs. In 1998, this was the case for only 40% of households with worst case housing needs. This represents a 40% increase in working households with worst case housing needs from 1995 to 1999 (U.S. Housing and Urban Development, 2001).The connection between impoverished workers and homelessness can be seen in homeless shelters, many of which house significant numbers of full-time wage earners. A survey of 27 U.S. cities found that over one in four people in homeless situations are employed, a significant increase from 1998 (U.S. Conference of Mayors, 2000). In a number of cities not surveyed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors - as well as in many states - the percentage is even higher (National Coalition for the Homeless, 1997).[This message has been edited by schrafinator, 08-10-2003]

quote:

---

Why would that happen, other than the mental illness you mention? Even at McDonald's you get raises and progress over time. My wife was working at McDonald's when I met her. She was 20, and she was making more money than I was.

---

Do you really think that working at McDonalds is a career path that sets up lots of undereducated people for success.Read Eric Schlosser's "Fast Food Nation" sometime. McDonalds has consistently moved towards less and less training for it's employees in order to cut costs.

quote:

---

Interestingly enough, as an aside, that was in Germany (since Europe's been discussed in this thread), and she was making less than she would have been in the U.S., but she was making more than my landlady's son, who was around thirty. He was making DM 2700/mo (in 1987), and I remember wondering how he was making ends meet with the amount of money the German government must have been taking from that 2700. He had a wife and new baby. He did seem to be doing fine, though.

---

Could it be because the taxes the German government take out of his earnings go towards services that actually benefit him, such as national health care and low-cost, subsidized transportation and housing?

quote:

---

I'd say what I feel but then your husband would have to kill me.

---

Wow.Cool.