Now That SQ 744 Has Tanked, What To Do About Common Education

[nathanm]

It could be argued that the reason why many schools are struggling as compared to 30 years ago is that people, on the whole, are poorer and work longer hours. When I was a kid, at least half the families had a parent who either didn't work or only worked a half day in the morning, so there was both time and energy left for parents to help kids with schoolwork, make them do it, or whatever.

I think it's a damn shame we don't do more to attack poverty in this country, as reducing it would reduce the severity so many other problems. The programs we do have (like housing) end up putting families in crappy neighborhoods where there are a lot of bad influences on the kids. This is one of my biggest problems with section 8 housing. It's all concentrated in not great neighborhoods instead of spread out across the community. I find it difficult to believe that has zero effect on kids' school performance.

[Conan71]

There's no easy solution to poverty other than at the individual level.  Someone has to decide they are tired of living like that and do something about it.  Again it's a mis-guided notion that government can cure everything.  Section 8 housing by it's very nature attracts crime because it's a government-sponsored ghetto.  We have spread Sec. 8 through the city of Tulsa and all it's done is spread crime throughout the city.  25 years ago, 61st & Riverside was actually a really good area.  I had friends who lived at Sand Dollar apartments and they were very much a hip place to live.  The apartments to the east of there were older but not run down.

Same thing with east Tulsa. 

Government solutions to poverty have done nothing but increase dependence on government.  I really don't know what a better answer is, all I can say is what we've done about it in the past has been a complete failure.  Far as I'm concerned the only solution that works is someone working their way out of it on their own with help from the community, and there's plenty of help there for those who really want out of the cycle.

[nathanm]

That's the thing. There isn't that much help. I do agree that change has to come from within, but in many cases there are medical issues or a lack of education preventing people from helping themselves. I think that, in the main, government's help should be primarily focused on making sure people get enough to eat and have the help needed to remove roadblocks to their improving themselves.

A kid can't learn very well if they don't eat and if they don't have any idea where they're going to be sleeping tonight.

Like you, I've got no farking clue what the solution is, but agree that what we're doing obviously isn't working.

When I said section 8 should be decentralized, I mean really decentralized. Even today, section 8 housing is concentrated in a few areas in town. TBH, I'd like to see a few folks in my neighborhood, a few folks in your neighborhood, and a few folks in everybody's neighborhood. Never should there be 20 or 30 section 8 recipients living in the same apartment complex. Few are willing to see the house next door turned into subsidized housing, though.

And there aren't all that many landlords interested in taking the vouchers, which is part of the reason why the recipients end up concentrated in a few areas.

[Conan71]

That's the thing. There isn't that much help. I do agree that change has to come from within, but in many cases there are medical issues or a lack of education preventing people from helping themselves. I think that, in the main, government's help should be primarily focused on making sure people get enough to eat and have the help needed to remove roadblocks to their improving themselves.

A kid can't learn very well if they don't eat and if they don't have any idea where they're going to be sleeping tonight.

Like you, I've got no farking clue what the solution is, but agree that what we're doing obviously isn't working.

When I said section 8 should be decentralized, I mean really decentralized. Even today, section 8 housing is concentrated in a few areas in town. TBH, I'd like to see a few folks in my neighborhood, a few folks in your neighborhood, and a few folks in everybody's neighborhood. Never should there be 20 or 30 section 8 recipients living in the same apartment complex. Few are willing to see the house next door turned into subsidized housing, though.

And there aren't all that many landlords interested in taking the vouchers, which is part of the reason why the recipients end up concentrated in a few areas.

I agree sprinkling sounds like a great idea, but with what the government can spend on vouchers, it's going to wind up in the same areas of smaller houses, lower rents, and well, we know what follows.  You simply can't get Section 8 into Maple Ridge, Riverview, Florence Park, or even Lortondale. It's not economically feasible.  As well, when Section 8 comes in, the rats come with it.  That's not to say everyone who is on Section 8 is a criminal, it simply seems to follow them around and you slowly decrease the value of properties around the Section 8's.

[nathanm]

As well, when Section 8 comes in, the rats come with it.  That's not to say everyone who is on Section 8 is a criminal, it simply seems to follow them around and you slowly decrease the value of properties around the Section 8's.

To be fair, people with recent criminal records and drug/alcohol abuse problems aren't eligible for section 8. (or much other help, for that matter, which probably doesn't help recidivism)

Ideally, the economy would work for everybody, and then it wouldn't be such a problem. With unemployment so much higher for folks without college degrees (around 30% a few months ago) and under 25s, there's no money coming in for them to use to better themselves. It's a vicious cycle, and it's been getting worse for 30 years now. Most of the progress we've made in getting people off the welfare rolls have been due to the peaks in our economic cycles and just straight kicking people off assistance after several years.

[Townsend]

To be fair, people with recent criminal records and drug/alcohol abuse problems aren't eligible for section 8. (or much other help, for that matter, which probably doesn't help recidivism)

It doesn't keep them from moving in with GF/BF's or family members who are eligible.

[nathanm]

It doesn't keep them from moving in with GF/BF's or family members who are eligible.

Technically, it does, but there's not strong enforcement.

[Conan71]

To be fair, people with recent criminal records and drug/alcohol abuse problems aren't eligible for section 8. (or much other help, for that matter, which probably doesn't help recidivism)

Ideally, the economy would work for everybody, and then it wouldn't be such a problem. With unemployment so much higher for folks without college degrees (around 30% a few months ago) and under 25s, there's no money coming in for them to use to better themselves. It's a vicious cycle, and it's been getting worse for 30 years now. Most of the progress we've made in getting people off the welfare rolls have been due to the peaks in our economic cycles and just straight kicking people off assistance after several years.

People with prior convictions aren't the problem, it's people with future convictions that is.  But that's getting a little 1984. 

[Townsend]

Well anyway, I'm sticking with my idea of online classes with the ability to chime in as a test of attendance.

People with more intellect than I can come up with the usage rules.

[Quinton]

Charge a per kid fee.

[Hoss]

Charge a per kid fee.

[TheArtist]

I agree sprinkling sounds like a great idea, but with what the government can spend on vouchers, it's going to wind up in the same areas of smaller houses, lower rents, and well, we know what follows.  You simply can't get Section 8 into Maple Ridge, Riverview, Florence Park, or even Lortondale. It's not economically feasible.  As well, when Section 8 comes in, the rats come with it.  That's not to say everyone who is on Section 8 is a criminal, it simply seems to follow them around and you slowly decrease the value of properties around the Section 8's.

Actually, in some places  (usually in cities that have much lower crime rates, hmmmm) its required that every new housing development, neighborhood, apartment complex, condo building, etc. have a small percentage be for low income. We all pay for low income/section 8 housing one way or the other.

[guido911]

Actually, in some places  (usually in cities that have much lower crime rates, hmmmm) its required that every new housing development, neighborhood, apartment complex, condo building, etc. have a small percentage be for low income. We all pay for low income/section 8 housing one way or the other.

So in those places where those who may not want to live around Sec. 8/low income housing are forced to?

[nathanm]

So in those places where those who may not want to live around Sec. 8/low income housing are forced to?

Redlining has been against the law for quite some time now.

[RecycleMichael]

Well anyway, I'm sticking with my idea of online classes

My dog crashed my hard drive with the homework on it..