Savannah Regis first book blog

1. What is the central idea or premise of the book thus far?
     I think the central idea so far is to show what a problem poverty is and how poorly it is being handled. Ambramsky illustrated the real struggles of poverty and gives alternative ideas on how to solve the problem or at least a better way. I empathize with her argument because there has to be better ways because what we, as a country, are doing now, isn't working. I think she is frustrated and wants to open the reader eyes to things they make not think about or realize. 

3. Have any specific passages from the book have struck you so far? If so,
which ones?

     On page 51 she says "In the same way that our political culture lacks the language to adequately confront poverty, so too in recent years it has lacked a vocabulary to explain why rampant inequality is a problem." This line really stuck out to me because I believe combating poverty should be a political issue but it is treated like a personal issue. So often we assume people are lazy, uneducated, on drugs, etc. and that is why they are poor, people fail to see the flaws and inequality of our economic system as a problem and until people can see that, I don't think anything will change. 

 

4. On page 51, Abramsky wrote “There is, after all, a reason Swedes...tolerate
far higher taxes than Americans do.” What does Abramsky mean by this?

       Americans complain a lot about their high taxes because it doesn't feel like they're going to help the citizens, around tax season you always hear, "what am I paying all these taxes for?" Yeah, we all know they're going towards schools and roads but they feel useless when your kid fails math and you have to get tires a season early cause you hit pot holes everyday. Where as in Sweden they reap the benefits of their taxes everyday, it makes sense to them because it actually improves their everyday lives. Most Americans don't believe their taxes benefit their lives.

Book Title: The American way of poverty: How the other half still lives

Author: Sasha Abramsky

Reviewer: Marissa Norris

Dr. Moyer

The reality of the state of poverty in America has gone without government intervention for so long that is so expensive to fix. Absolute and relative poverty are common measures of poverty for many citizens in rural and urban communities.

The reality of poverty being detailed as a crisis was what stood out to me from the Abramsky book: The American way of poverty: How the other half still lives. Many Americans who live in rural communities lack the same accessible resources those in big cities have. If I was to suddenly in major crisis I would depend on my emergency fund to help me with any immediate expenses. I would seek out any resources that would help me become more stable as well. Emotionally many in poverty do not have a supportive resource to see out when needed.  A trusted individual can listen, share encouragement, and offer a helping hand. It is important that an individual understand that their current situation is not their final destination. Functioning physically and psychologically during a crisis can have long-term effects on an individual. I’ve experienced poverty in the past when my income limited my ability to have basic needs. Paying for adequate shelter, having access to clean running water, and clothing for daily living seemed impossible to afford on my tight living budget. Like some Americans I was approved for Food Stamps which provided me the additional financial support to adjust my spending and put myself in a more stable position. I no longer require Food Stamps assistance and would like to help others no longer depend on Food Stamps.

I would recommend this book to others. I feel many youth lack an understand of homelessness in American. By informing the youth on this crisis the likelihood of them being homeless is less. Children are the future and it is important we share informant to help them develop. Not sharing how homelessness is a crisis means it not occurring. If we ignore the many people lacking access to adequate shelter, having access to clean running water, and clothing for daily living we are saying they do not matter.

5 STARS = Highly recommend

Stephanie Flier Blog post #1

Stephanie Flier
Blog post #1
What is the central idea or premise of the book thus far?
In my opinion, I feel that Abramsky is expressing his pure disappointment on how poverty is handled in our country. While reading the first few chapters, Abramsky vocalized various alternatives to combat or even attempt to alter the amount of poverty American’s face everyday. I found it interesting that he was able to give alternatives for poverty, but yet many of these ideas have been given before just not acted upon. While reading the passages talking about the alternatives to poverty, I was interested to know that someone outside of politics is so obviously aware of possible solutions. I feel that the main idea of this book is to convey the apparentness of poverty in our country, as well as for Abramsky to get his views and opinions out there while opening the eyes of his readers.

Have any specific passages from the book have struck you so far? If so,
which ones?
Page 4, “Too poor to participate in the consumption rituals.......a sense of being shut out of most basic rituals of society”
I reread this passage three times because it was the most accurate description of poverty I think I have ever read. Throughout this class it has become apparent that poverty doesn’t mean you are homeless, begging for money on the street. Poverty falls anywhere from absolute, to someone that is “too cash strapped to go to malls”, before this class and reading this passage, my mind wouldn’t have ever classified that as poverty but now I am more aware and I hope others are too.

On page 51, Abramsky wrote “There is, after all, a reason Swedes…tolerate
far higher taxes than Americans do.” What does Abramsky mean by this?
Abramsky expresses that Swedes pay higher taxes without hesitation or backlash because they get something worth it in return. As he puts it, “pay good money get good quality services”. In America, you don’t necessarily know what type of quality childcare, or health benefits you are receiving you are strictly paying for what you can afford.

American Way of Poverty : Tyler Stephens

American Way of Poverty

1.   1.    What is the central idea or premise of the book thus far?

The central idea of this blog is most directed towards poverty in America.  This book tried to inform the audience about the awareness of poverty.  This is because poverty can affect any demographics. Whether you have a degree or being uneducated, to having it all too completely losing it all.  Educating yourself on the awareness of poverty is very beneficial for your future.  

2.      2. What evidence does Abramsky use to support his ideas?

Evidence that Abramsky uses to support his ideas and providing the short stories of the several individual lives.  In their stories they share their experiences and how hard it was for surpass their struggle.  When reading the stories I realized they didn’t have any barriers while telling their story.  They gave actual real life situations and discussed their unfortunate lifestyles. 

3.

  3         3..     Have any specific passages from the  book have struck you  so far? If so, which ones?

All the passages were very striking and they all were very informing.   At the same time it all sounded so familiar.  I have seen the struggle and I have dealt with it.   I have close relatives that still suffer from poverty today.   These passages were more motivating to me because it reminded of how much I hated living in poverty.  It made me realize how much I hated going days without food, how my mom lost her job, how our home went into foreclosure.  I remember all these tragic nights all too clear.  The passage didn’t just motivate me but it also made to realize that I have to plan for days like this.  Anything can happen and it can affect for life.  It felt good to hear other people share their stories. 

The american way of poverty pgs 1-97

Tateyanna Fisher
2-14-16
Disadvantage Families

What is the central idea or premise of the book thus far?
 The central idea of the book is to inform readers on the constructed government we are being ran by. The book gives the back ground information for all of today's actions. Americans have come far but we have a very long way to go. poverty is installed in almost everyone who were not born with "a silver spoon" in their mouth.

 Have any specific passages from the book have struck you so far?  If so, which ones
There was a sentence that stuck out to me, "for what is caused by human choices can, mostly,  be solved by human choices." This stuck out to me because the author is basically saying, we got our selves in this mess, we can get our selves out. It offers hope and blame. I said hope because there is something that can be done to help decrease the poverty issues here in the United States. I also say blame because it owned up to the possibility that we caused our own problems looking for ways to solve other ones.

On page 51, Abramsky wrote “There is, after all, a reason Swedes…tolerate far higher taxes than Americans do.”  What does Abramsky mean by this?
This Quote to me means that as the following sentences stated, "Rather, it's because they actually get their money's worth from their taxes," I agree with this statement. Most people in America are living pay check to pay check as is, so is there was a way to make sure the money is going to a proper usage, things may run a little bit better. They are receiving quality for their money, from there services and products. if we had a better system controlling and looking after the money we would not have families going to bed hungry or not having a home to go to.

Cynthia Libby Blog

Cynthia Libby

Question 1:

 So far, the tone that the author uses in the first 97 pages of the book seems as though he is stressing the fact that poverty is something that can be prevented. We as a society are part to blame and the government is the other responsible party to blame. Abramsky presents the facts in a way that highlights both the positive and negative things being done by the government to combat the effects of poverty but always seems to end with a tone that suggests more can be done. This book thus far has been extremely informative and I like the way Abramsky presents the facts even though his tone suggests there may be some bias in the way he writes. However, I do not think that he is wrong for presenting the facts in such a manner.

Question 3:

              On page 22, there is a passage in which Michael Steinman is talking about his students and their stories of poverty they compiled for a video project. One of the students, Oliver Lopez describes his family’s struggles and how he feels as though he does nothing for the family while his father is out working two jobs just to make ends meet. This particular story struck me because this 18 year old feels as though going to school is not enough and he has a sense of guilt. I thought about my own life with this passage. When I was 18 my life consisted of going to school, playing volleyball, and working a few hours during the week and on weekends to save money for college. I worked because I wanted too, not because I was forced too or because I had to help my family make ends meet. I think more people need to hear stories like Oliver’s to really appreciate what they have in their own lives.

Question 6:

              Abramsky states the statistic on page 45 that in 1996, just before the welfare reform, 4.43 million families across the nation were on Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), which was the main welfare program for families in deep poverty. Then in 2010, almost two years into the economic crisis that created the worst economic environment since the Great Depressoin, only 1.86 million families were on the successor program to AFDC. It was around this time that the shift in attitudes about welfare changed. Political figures are part to blame for this change in attitude because they have publicly implied that those accessing food stamps to avoid malnutrition and hunger were taking advantage of the opportunity and did not want to better themselves. These political figures implied that people on food stamps were comfortable living this way and had no desire to change.

Blog 1. The American Way of Poverty

Samantha Blakney

The central idea of this book is poverty in America. It talks about different people's lives in America that are dealing with poverty. I think personal stories get to people more than statistics do and this book has both.

Abramsky uses statistics to support his ideas. Some of his ideas come from CBS News and the census bureau.

I'm completely shocked by the total amount of people in poverty. It makes me sad knowing that people are out there barely getting any food and I always have a warm place to sleep and food to eat usually whenever I'm hungry. Another thing that struck me what the average amount of money earned per year. I made $14,000 in 2014 and the 20% in the lower population made under $15,000 in 2011. That's crazy to me. I had people to support me and feed me if i couldn't make ends meet, like parents and grandparents and those people have no one.

Katelyn Blog post#1

Abramsky's The American Way Of Poverty, I believe is very eye opening. Poverty is everywhere! As I was reading my heart sank just knowing the way that some of these people, Abramsky interviewed were living. This has been a rowing epidemic. This book is touching on the subject that everyone needs to know about and why it is such a huge problem in the United States. There are many forms of poverty. For example,  while reading this book I found out that living paycheck to paycheck is a major form of poverty. Not being able to afford meals for your children,  not having enough money to pay for rent and bills, etc. I am so glad that there are assistance programs that can help out with the daily necessities that are needed.

3.    Does the information covered in the book conflict with what you have already learned about or thought about the issue?

I do not believe that the information that is provided in this book conflicts with what we have already learned about poverty.  Unemployment was a huge topic in the first chapter, I was not aware of the percentage of people who are unemployed. What really suprised me when I was reading the 1st chapter was that some hiring signs that are put up in advertsing jobs that say" Unemployed need not to apply." My thoughts on this particular idea is that people who are unemployed would be hard workers and want to do their part. Why would you treat someone like that and not even give them a chance.

4.  How does the book help you understand the subject? This book goes into more detail about who, where and what is affected by poverty. Like we have said, poverty is everywhere in this world! This book mainly talks about how poverty affects the United States.

 6. Would you recommend this book to others? Why or why not? 

When we finish reading the book, I am pretty sure I will be recommending this book to everyone I know! This topic is world wide and will help people understand more about what poverty really is. I have overheard someone talking badly about individuals who use WIC or other assistance programs and they just do not understand why they exist and think that many people who use the recources are doing so to take advantage of things. For example, buying a big TV and not having food to feed your family. 

 

Elisa Ransom Abramsky Blogger

Elisa Ransom

FCS 4840

Book Blog/Pages 1-97

February 14, 2016

On page 51, Abramsky wrote “There is, after all, a reason Swedes…tolerate far higher taxes than Americans do.”  What does Abramsky mean by this?

Abramsky is referring to an anti-tax, anti-government movement, where the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court ruling allowed outside interest groups to spend freely on attack ads and “independent expenditure” campaigns. Abramsky stated that the method was simple:  If you defund public services, ensure that government only delivers second-rate goods, convince the electorate that long-term societal investment such as Social Security and Medicare are Ponzi schemes unlikely to survive down the generations, and it becomes easier to convince ordinary people that taxes are a mugging rather than an investment.  So basically in the end, they will get their money’s worth from their taxes.  The pay good money and get good quality services while American’s public receives duds.  My take on what Abramsky is saying is simple, we hear how the government says at the rate we are going there may not be any Social Security for us in the future.  Social Security may be obsolete by the time it is my time to draw from it.  My solution to that is, what happen to all the money that people didn’t us because they died before they could us it? Where is the money at for those individuals who just simple didn’t use the money because they are not here to partake in there hard earned money, then will it seem as a Ponzi scheme then if the money comes from dead people.  Just a critical thinking question for one to ponder on.

Have any specific passages from the book struck you so far?  If so, which one?

            As I quote from the book:  Between 1950 and 1975, Johnston calculated, for each additional dollar in income most Americans received $4.  From 1960 to 1985, it was $17.  “And for 1981 through 2005, it is almost $5000.  For the top 0.01 percent of the economy, that number was a staggering $140,000.  In other words, if an average earner took home $100 more one year, it was reasonable to assume that the billionaire living across town had increased his income by roughly $14 million during that same period.  That just struck a chord with me, simply because the top 5% of income earners run this country.  They own their businesses and employ people and merely give them pennies, making it to where employees can’t even make ends meet to pay their everyday bills.  As much money as the top 5% of the earners make who really run this county such as the Walmart clan, they can pay their employees enough money to make ends meet and then some.  At least they could pay enough for families to be able to enough a feasible vacation every once in a while. One person with billions of dollars should put some back into the economy to help build it up.  It doesn’t make sense to me that one person has all that money and does not share.  It just makes me feel some type of way that people with that much money have a one track mind, let me make this money make money and I’m getting richer while the economy falls but I’ll be safe because I have the money.  Abramsky stated in the book that if a few hundred billionaires got together and controlled several trillion dollars in assets that it would be enough to pay median income salaries for years on end to tens of millions of workers.  The questions is why are Americans starving?  It’s not because most don’t have an education because you have folks with master degrees and can’t find a job let alone pay their bills and feed their families.  This just makes me so mad.

What evidence does Abramsky use to support his ideas?

            Abramsky brings the effects of economic inequality out of the shadows, and ultimately, suggests ways for moving toward a fairer and more equitable social contract.   Exploring everything from housing policy to wage protections and affordable higher education, Abramsky lays out a panoramic blueprint for a reinvigorated political process that, in turn, will pave the way for a renewed War on Poverty.

Haley Muller's Post-

The idea of the book so far is to explain to us just how bad poverty truly is. It is educating us of the many aspects of poverty and who it effects. In this book there have been multiple personal experiences that have provided us with real examples that are truly eye opening. The book also puts some focus on politicians that may be involved in poverty and their attempts to help it or maybe even cause it. Policies that were created by politicians are discussion such as Medicaid, TANF, SNAP, etc. 

All of the passages have struck me in a different way. One that stood out to me was on page 50. It was about a woman named Megan that was both a wife and mother of 4. Just after their family had been kicked off Medicaid for just a $1 raise to her husbands salary, she suffered a ruptured appendix. After all said and done they could not afford the medical bills. They had been kicked off all the other programs they had qualified for and had no money; they filed for bankruptcy. This hits home because my father got into a terrible motorcycle accident, it left our family with medical bills that exceeded $200,000 because of all of the surgeries needed and time spent in the hospital wasn't exactly cheap either. My parents had to declare bankruptcy because they could not afford to keep paying for all the medical bills. 

The one passage that stuck out to me most was on page 60. It was about a 14 year old high school girl. Her father had lost his job and she was starving. The goal was for her and her father to attain a higher education so that they could become more than who they were at that time. To me this is very sad. Especially when I hear stories about a young child and just one parent. I wonder, where is the other parent? It is sad enough to be in such a heart breaking situation, but to not have both parents must be even harder on the child. It is amazing how one situation is so different from the next. They are all very sad to hear.

U.S Government has put in policies such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) that has provided those who are at the poverty level with food essentially helping the safety net. This is so that people who are low-income can eat. Obama was also seen as the president that helped make this happen. Medicaid policies were and still are available to those who are at extreme low-income levels as well. With every new political office, I believe, comes policies (and even changes in policies) that directly effect the part of our population that is at the poverty level. One politician may be very willing to help out those in need, while  another may change the requirements of those policies so that less people qualify.

Kaila Phelps
February 13, 2016

Have any passages from the book struck you so far? If so, which ones?

There have been many different stories throughout the book. One passage that struck me was when it stated, "Medicare and Medicaid expanded to healthcare. Yes, an expanded food stamps program cut down hunger...But for all of the investments, poverty remained part of the national landscape" (Abramsky, 2013, p. 77). This passage really stood out because it puts into perspective all of the different things the government is saying they're helping with but in reality nothing is changing.


On page 51, Abramsky wrote "There is, after all, a reason Swedes... tolerate for higher taxes than Americans do." what does Abramsky mean by this?

Abramsky mentioned how "It's not because they have some strange Scandinavian-only pro-tax genes in their DNA" (Abramsky, 2013, p. 51). Meaning that quality education, healthcare, childcare, vacation times, and pensions are not just given to them. When paying a lot for goods or services the end result is having a better quality outcome. Since America fights for trying to have lower taxes we have poorer quality goods and services.   


What does Abramsky mean by the heading "walling off the poor" in Chapter 3?

 When Abramsky titles the header "walling off the poor" Sasha means that we put up a wall, ignore or turn our heads when thinking about people in poverty. Americans assume there is nothing they can do so they disregard the issue. It is upsetting that people ignore the issues that don't affect them. Paying it forward was mentioned in this passage and I would have to say this would be an awesome way in helping some of the people in poverty. Every little thing can help.

References:

Abramsky, S. (2013). The American Way of Poverty. New York, New York: Nation Books.

Abramsky The American Way of Poverty Blog 1

              I think the central idea of the book thus far is about poverty in America. No matter what a person background or occupation is you can be affected by poverty. This book show insight on how poverty really affect people. I think this book also show how people become under the poverty line. Many people think people that are in poverty are lazy and don’t want to work. But really it’s the economic that failed the people. Evidence from Abramsky book would be the short stories on individuals personal lives. The stories I have read explain their struggles and how they got there. 

               What struck me the most was reading the little stories on the individuals. It amaze me how a person can come from having everything to having nothing. The mother was an accountant with two teenagers. From my knowledge being an accountant is a great paying job. She came from $60,000 to $20,000 a year. That is a big change in anyone life. The lady talk about the struggles she had finding a job. She didn’t understand why she wasn’t getting a job with great references. She also goes to say how she went through her saving, retirement, and unemployment benefits. Another specific passages that stuck me was the English teacher. Both the teacher and students was affected by poverty. Students told their stories about living in poverty. The teacher could tell his student was affected by their family struggles. He noticed because their work began to show it. Students found it hard to focus because they was worried about home. Worrying about if there would still be a place to call home. Wondering where the next meal would come from. Even thinking about leaving school to get a job to help make ends meet. I feel bad for the students and parents because everyone is affected badly. 

Lanise Florence

Jasmine James Post- February 14, 2016

1. What is the central idea or premise of the book thus far? From reading the first 100 pages of this book, I feel that the central idea or premise of the book is to bring out the awareness of poverty in America. The author main focus is to show the readers how the other half of America is surviving and what are they surviving off of. So far this book had gave the readers numerous of examples of poverty in America. The author has pointed out some interesting facts that lets us know that there are many companies and individuals suffering from poverty and he also gave a few pointer on how people make ends meet.

2. What evidence does Abramsky use to support his ideas? So far in this book Abramsky has talked about and spoken with people that are living in impoverished conditions. For instance in the first chapter it talks about the neighborhood food pantry and how the demands are high but there is little to no-donations from the people or the government. A women that makes $592 in social security checks explained to the author about how she have to make ends meet every month. She depends on food pantries and whatever assistance she can get to survive.  

3. When did the attitudes towards welfare recipients shift in the U.S.? The attitudes towards welfare shifted in the 1980s. It all started when Ronald Reagan referred to “Welfare queens”, as “Cadillac-driving moochers impudently turning up at the government offices claiming their checks”. He wanted to make it harder for people to get welfare. In other words they assume the worst of applicants that they would cheat the system more than they need it to survive.

               

Blog Post #1: Daja Hearn February 14, 2016

1.  What is the central idea or premise of the book thus far?

                 In my opinion I believe the main idea of the book gives insight to what poverty actually is. Not only does it do this, but it also demonstrates that there is no one particular type of family poverty effects. This also brings awareness to poverty. Poverty is something that is always gets pushed to the side and not enough awareness it brought to attention. Within this first part of the book it uses real life stories and also statistics from the U.S. Census to implement these facts.

2. What evidence does Abramsky use to support his ideas?

                One thing I have enjoyed thus far is the personal stories. As a young teen I used to love to read the books where it was coming from an actual person’s perspective. Abramsky does this by using these personal stories and with theses there is no sugar coating. By reading I feel I experience what these people with through in a way. Loss of a job, becoming ill, growing up in poverty, are all examples that are given in the book so far within personal stories.  Another way his evidence is supported is also by the U.S. Census.

3. On page 51, Abramsky wrote “There is, after all, a reason Swedes……tolerate far higher taxes than American do” What does Abramsky mean by this?

                Abramsky says this following the quote above “Swedes receive quality education, healthcare childcare, vacation time, and pensions courtesy of their government”. In other words he is says that the Swedes can see what their taxes are going for and how their money is spent. Also this means that they can appreciate what these high taxes are accomplishing within the healthcare field and in the schooling. Here Americans do not have that. We do not see where are taxes are going and the things that our taxes do go towards to not be beneficial to everyone.

Abramsky- The American Way Of Poverty book blog by Megan Wence

The focal point of this book is to point out how big of an issue poverty is all around us, and how it affects each and every one of us at some point in our lives. This may be something that we are going through in our personal lives, it could be affecting someone that we know, could be someone that we work with in our careers, or someone who happens to cross our paths at some point in our lives. I thought it was an interesting statement when Abramsky stated that poverty stock piled in the twenty first century which eventually led towards even worse economic hardships for families. It's a scary statistic that families who have a "temporary hiccup" often times have a hard time recovering from that. Families seem to get used to not having very much, and have a hard time trying to break that cycle if that is all that they know. It's also a harsh and startling statistic to read from the 2010 census bureau that 15.1 percent of Americans were living below the poverty line, and that 34.2% of single mothers and their children were living in poverty. I can openly and honestly say that I was a part of this statistic being a single mother raising my son. I relied on welfare and community assistance for help and survival needs. I can now proudly say that I have broken that cycle, but it wasn't an easy thing to do. 

Questions:

1. What is the central premise or idea of this book so far?

          This book is serving to show us and teach us how severe poverty is. Abramsky traveled all over the world to interview the poor. He lets us know that there are poor people without a high school or college education, and then there are poor people who have college degrees who can't find work. He states that people have all different backgrounds, but poverty can strike us all at any time. The author seems to think that our country is failing us and not doing enough to help with everyone from congress to the United States congress. If they aren't willing to help, we are fighting a lost cause. We want to believe what people of power in politics are saying and fighting for, but then when they get in a position to make changes, they let us down. 

4. Abramsky states There is, after all a reason why Swedes tolerate far higher taxes than Americans do. What does he mean by this?

          I think it means that since they are getting taken care of really well by their government, that they don't mind paying the higher taxes. Just like he stated with a good education, better health care, child care, vacation time and pensions. They feel as if they are getting quality services for the taxes that they are paying. In the Unites States we don't feel as if we are being taken care of in the same way. If a family is on the medical card, they don't get the same quality of care for example. In my opinion it goes with the saying " you get what you pay for" If you are willing to pay a higher price for something, it's going to be a better quality service or product. 

7. What does Abramsky mean by "walling off the poor"?

         My understanding of this statement is that he feels that not enough people have taken the time or effort to put into understanding poverty, and how we can fix this huge issue. No one wants to offer any solutions, or show compassion to those in need, and that is the problem. That's why I think he said walling off the poor, so rather than dealing with the actual issue, it can be swept under the rug as if it doesn't exist at all. If this current way of thinking doesn't change, it's only going to become an even bigger issue that we will all have to face at some point in our lives. 

        

The Other half-

Gloria Winchester-OBrien's Post

February 14, 2016

The Other half- Blog

          

I had a hard time writing a blog about the first 96 pages of the author Sasha Abramsky’s “The American way of poverty-How the other half lives”. I was born in the 60’s and lived in poverty during many the eras described in this book. I remember that very often my family of eleven did not have enough food to eat. A big pot of spaghetti noodles and a can of tomato juice was a commonly prepared meal for us. I also remember when food stamps first became available to us. My mom was so embarrassed of having to use food stamps that we only used them when we shopped in a community outside our home town where we were unlikely to see anyone we knew. Abramsky’s book mentions the embarrassment felt by so many who were forced through their great need to accept government aid. This book brought these memories back to me.

One particular passage that totally struck me references that the well to do have somehow gotten God’s approval whereas the poor don’t have it. “I am rich because I am a good person; I am a chosen person; I am marked by God for greatness. You are poor because you can’t cut it with the creator” (Abramsky, 2013, p.65). I grew up poor but I think my family was much closer to be marked by God than many of the rich families I knew who said cruel things to my mom. For example, my mom belonged to a ladies club that played cards at each other’s homes, when it was my mom’s turn to host the party. One particularly well off lady refused to come to our old run down farmhouse, so my mom never did host the lady’s club and she dropped out of the club. Though our house was old it was always kept spotlessly clean which is quite amazing considering there were nine children and two adults living there. I remember her comment caused my mom to cry. I refuse to believe that people like her are the chosen of God.

I grew up thinking Nixon was the scourge of the earth, and after reading that he won the 1968 election by stoking popular resentment against welfare recipients (Abramsky, 2013, p.4) reinforces my early opinion of the man. However, despite his resentment federal systems were created but it was left up to the states to fund and administer them. In many Southern states anti-tax sentiments, combined with extreme racism and class stratifications made the creation and expansion of these systems for the poor nearly impossible (Abramsky 2013, p. 67).

After reading about the 2008 Village Academy video mentioned in this book (Abramsky, 2013, p. 21), I decided to see if it was still available. It was, so I watched the video. I’m not sure why Barack Obama chose this particular video to make a public comment on or to visit their town. Perhaps this was a publicity stunt to prove Obama really does care about the plight of underprivileged kids in America but he needs to do a lot more to prove this conviction. Especially, since the author tells us that all the hoopla surrounding the video did very little to improve the plight of the students and families featured in the video.

Abramsky, (2013) paints a depressing yet realistic picture of America’s economic decline. These first 96 pages offer little hope for what is currently being done to change the downward spiral from the past to today. There were a few rays of sunshine peeking through the clouds of our economic decline, but for the most part they are all but hidden from our view. I am hoping in the future pages of the book the author will offer realistic suggestions of how the fortunate half and our political leaders can improve the plight of America’s other half.

Amber Webb, blog 1

I feel the the premise of the book is to bring awareness to poverty in the United States and to offer insight and ideas of how we can change to help eliminate it.  Abramsky offers many personal stories, information from The Other America, and statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau to support his ideas.

            There have been several passages that have struck me this far.  The passage on page 33 discussing the most affluent people shocked me with the statistic, “…about 30,000 Americans control one in thirty of the dollars circulating among a population of roughly 300 million people” (Abramsky, 2013) really shocked me. I was also surprised to find Georgia does not provide medical coverage to childless, low income adults (Abramsky, 2013, p.69). I feel if people are unable to find a job that either provides coverage or pays enough for the employee to purchase it on their own, help is necessary.  One accident or big illness can put a couple into a hole they will never be able to dig out of. Another passage that struck me was the section about the progressive area and President Johnson’s recognition of the country’s poor. His state of the union address is inspiring (Abramsky, 2013, p. 75-77).

            I feel when Abramsky says Swedes tolerate a lot higher taxes than we as Amercians do, he means Swedes feel they are receiving something for their taxes.  I would gladly tolerate higher taxes if I were receiving health care, a quality education for myself and my sons, childcare, and more in exchange for those taxes.