Macaulay Honors College Seminar 4 | Professor Robin Rogers

Tag: inequality

Housing

Homelessness is a pervasive issue in New York City especially, as evidenced by the fact that many of our first thoughts for Issues of New York was homelessness. Interestingly, I don’t think anyone chose to follow up with it, likely because it is so often a dead end policy-wise and emotion-wise. In New York we don’t even see homeless people as human beings, just detritus. The Trevor Noah comedy night we had at Queens College last week involved a whole bit about homeless people trying to get money- as in, to survive- and everyone was laughing because they all know what’s it like from the outside looking in. And yet, these are human beings.

I read this lovely feature in the New York Times about a Girl Scout troop made up entirely of homeless girls and it was heartwarming. That HUD count that pointed out that 66 percent of homeless adults with children live with friends before entering shelters is vital to demonstrating that these families are trying. It’s just that people don’t have the ability to couch surf forever, especially with children.

When I was in elementary school, there was a little boy who used to annoy the hell out of me. He didn’t smell great, constantly fidgeted, and even fought with me. I complained about him to my mother, who went to the teacher, and the teacher, rather than shooing my mother off, actually explained to her that the boy had pent up energy and often was unable to shower properly because he lived in a shelter, and every day when he left school he had to go line up to make a bed for the night rather than playing with children his own age. Things like that exist because children continue to attend zoned schools even after they have lost their homes, often with little help from guidance counselors who have way too many other kids of whom to take care.  I worry most about children.

I agree with the idea presented at the end of Chapter 9 that finding permanent housing for people should take priority over making sure they have fixed their substance abuse issues. Having a place to live that isn’t in danger of disappearing on you is essential to feeling stable as a human being, and being able to live somewhere permanently gives one the freedom from that anxiety and allows one to focus on then self-improvement.

Housing discrimination certainly exists, but New York State has taken significant measures (at least on paper) to combat this issue. Of course, the real housing discrimination exists in the price tag.

Why is the United States of America so Damned Unequal?

Chapter 10 of the CQ Reader centers around inequality and the distribution of wealth in our country. The United States of America is one of the most unequal countries in the world, despite being among the wealthiest. The difficulty of so many issues facing America today is partisanship. Even the inclusion of Paul Krugman, an economist who should be a valid source in his own right, is qualified as being “liberal economy Paul Krugman”. The man is a Nobel Prizewinner and columnist for one of the most revered papers in the country, and yet his opinion comes down to whether he is a liberal or conservative.

It seems as though decreasing inequality is increasingly just a “liberal” fantasy, and that conservatives are all for augmenting the plight of the poor and working class and letting upper class people coast. I understand that this textbook of issues was created at the time of the 2016 very contentious election, but to continuously make reference to “Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders” or “Democrat Hillary Clinton” really detracts from what is supposedly the objective here: giving a view on the issue of inequality.

“Conservative economists and some liberals” discuss the history of the middle class. Why does it continuously come back to partisanship. The issue with the social sciences like economics and sociology are that so often everything seems politicized. Inequality should be an issue that all have concerns with, as it involves every single person in America regardless of where one is on the social class totem pole, and yet it is constantly grounds for debate. Instead of arguing about solutions, the apparent Schrödinger’s cat issue of the problem even existing is continuously thrown about as much as a football.

This is both a liberal and a conservative issue, both the issue itself and how it is dealt with. So much of the discussion of inequality focuses on finger pointing and blaming others, rather than offering any actual concrete policy goals to combat this. How am I supposed to take this seriously as an unbiased discussion of both sides when both sides are constantly labeled and it’s not difficult to tell who was consulted more?