Recently, I was shown a forwarded email that reminded me of the person I blogged last about, Bob. As I viewed this email I was in utter disbelief that images such as these are being passed around publicly. Call me naive, but I thought that Bob was the typical ignoramus. I did not realize that there is worse out there!

This stereotypical depiction is so offensive to myself, and so many others, whether a democrat or not. It is this kind of disgusting humor that not only hurts people, but pushes our country back decades.

This image is obviously targeted toward those people that are disadvantaged, that many view as "lazy", and those people that will "take money" from the "working people" and give it to the "lazy poor". That makes me sick. In this image, is everything we have discussed all semester. From the idea that the impoverished minorities are simply sitting around asking the government for money, to the idea that anyone willing to put time, effort, or funding, is to be shunned.

In class this past week, we discussed the uplifting book, "Comeback Cities", in which there are stories of people believing in hope, themselves, and their community, enough to come together and make a change on their own.

While this book was published in 2000, and many of these changes took place in the 1990s, I can only hope that they are still happening today, and that these people are stronger than myself and can ignore the terrible "comedy" that portrays all impoverished as poor and lazy.

I had an eye-opening conversation with someone, who I will name Bob, a few days before the presidential election. I knew going into this conversation, that Bob was extremely conservative in his views, but seemed willing to hear my point of view regarding my support for Obama.

In class, we talk about those people who are trapped in their "bubble"; people who have no concept of the tragic lives of those minorities living in poverty; those that think nothing is actually wrong, simply because they're so far removed from reality, even when these problems are occuring right in their city, town, or neighborhood.

Well, after a few minutes of letting Bob know that I was not only a democrat, but a huge Obama supporter, Bob said something that...well...just blew my mind with the ignorance that was being displayed. Bob said that he did not feel that his tax money should be used to help provide housing for everyone in America, especially since ALL of these people do not have housing because they are lazy and unwilling to work. I almost had a heart attack. My mind shot straight to the literature we have read in class that contain historical and factual information that has led to the slums and impoverished today.

I wish I could have given Bob these works, or at least had the guts to say something to him at that moment. I wish I would have explained the concept of covenants in neighborhoods and real estate, the "white flight" to suburbs, the increase of knowledge based jobs in the inner cities, the cyclical nature of the ghetto life, the lack of funding for education, and the fact that inner city minorities, at birth, are already 10 steps behind a middle class Caucasian.

I did not say anything, I simply nodded and grit my teeth. "These are the people we have been talking about in class", I thought, "that is one of them". I could not believe and I didn't want to believe that people this IGNORANT exist!! In the back of my mind I knew that they were out there, but had never spoken with someone, who I would consider to be an intelligent person, yet still held these beliefs.

I can only hope that it will be the younger generations, the people like myself and my classmates, and our new president (yay!) that will move our country forward, and begin to help with the problem instead of selfishly refusing to believe it exists.

Who will help?

In class last night we began a discussion, once again, of how to fix the problems of poverty and segregation in the inner city. Many people living in suburbs, who tend to be white and middle to upper middle class, seem to gain an attitude with their flight of "its not our problem". People that have the financial ability to leave do so, instead of trying to help fix these problems that plague the inner city. If this is the attitude of so many, how can we convince them to stay, to rebuild, or to simply give a helping hand?

I don't know. What I do know, however, is that it is people like Kuruvilla George, the now unemployed VP of Operations at Carraway Hospital. In this week's Birmingham Weekly I read a little blurb that I think deserves much more recognition. The facility is located in a declining neighborhood, much like the inner ring suburbs that we have discussed in class. It was also a hospital dedicated to charity, providing service regardless of one's ability to pay. These two factors are said to have led to the demise of the hosipital, as giving charity and remaining in a poor neighborhood are money losers.

In the last months of Carraway's life, George recognized the problems the hospital, as well as the surrounding area, faced. He knew this hospital provided care to the poor and jobs to many. Instead of fleeing the situation to a better job in a prospering area, which he very well could have done, George decided to help. He bought $9,000 worth of supplies for the hospital out of his own pocket.

While this did not save Carraway Hospital, it is the most refreshing act of dedication and kindness that has come out of Birmingham in a long time. It gives hope that there ARE people who are willing to stay put and sacrifice for the greater good of the community.

The Debate

As I was watching the final debate between Obama and McCain last night, something we discussed in class the previous week began to creep into my mind.

While talking about the article "A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures", we began to discuss the benefits to having many different municipalities that provide different levels of public services, allowing a citizen to choose the community that best meets their needs. This gives people a choice to live in a place that meets their standards and provides the best living environment for THEM. People can express their preferences and move to an area that matches those preferences.

An example was given in class: If Tiger Woods held a leadership position, and wanted every resident in all of greater Birmingham to pay $5000 in dues for a public golf course, is this fair? Well, no. This is not fair because not all residents play golf, or have an interest in funding a golf course, therefore, they should not be required to pay.

On the other hand, if all of the municipalities in greater Birmingham had different leaders, and Tiger Woods was the leader of one, and required the residents of his community to pay dues for a golf course, is this fair?
Well, yes. This is fair because if one has an interest in playing golf and funding a golf course in their area, they can move to the community that Tiger Woods leads. If they do not want to be a part of the golf course, they can move elsewhere. This gives people the CHOICE to live in the area that best meets their standards, and the choice to live in an area that values certain public services over others.

The topic of health care came up in the debate last night. McCain stressed that he did not want to require everyone to have the same health care plans, he wanted to give people choice. Obama talked about a national health insurance plan, allowing everyone the chance to have appropriate health coverage.

I began to find a parallel between the views of the candidates and the "Tiger Woods" example. Obama would like to promote a national health care system, having everyone receiving the same type of health insurance, without the option of making a choice based on ones own standards. This sounds like the first part of the example, in which Tiger Woods forces everyone in greater Birmingham to pay for the golf course, no one has a choice. The residents can't move somewhere else, because they will still have to pay the dues. With health care, citizens of the U.S. will not have the choice to move elsewhere to escape this plan, health care will be the same everywhere.

McCain, in theory of course, wants to give people a choice of health care plans. To me, this sounds like the second part of the example, allowing people to move to their choice location that meets their standards and needs of public service.

What is funny to me, is that in class I agreed with giving people a choice. It is not only right, but it reduces social welfare loss. However, with the debate, I agree with a national health care system, which, technically, does not allow for choice. Hmmmm...something to think about.

As a side note, I am voting for Obama.

Teach For America

My 21 year old cousin, a recent college graduate from the University of Texas, is a new participant in Teach For America. She, guided by her idealism, requested to be placed in one of the most high risk areas in the country, as rated by the program: Inner city Oakland, California. I just received an email from my mother, updating me on how Amanda is doing in her position as a 7th grade teacher for an especially troubled group of kids. My mother reports that she is having an extremely tough time and cries on the phone to her parents, my aunt and uncle, nearly everyday. Apparently her class consists of a group that has been together since the third grade, and not a single teacher they've had has lasted longer than 6 weeks! Amanda is supposed to have an aide, but there is not enough support to supply her with one. Just the other day, one of the male students started to beat up on one of the girls in the class. Amanda sent him to the office and they sent him right back.

In our last class discussion we spoke of how difficult it must be for someone to break out of the mentality that they have been raised with and that they experience in their home life everyday. How hard it must be for one, who is struggling to simply survive day-to-day, to go beyond that life and be motivated by another aspect, such as education. We all talk about this in class, and we believe in hope and ideals for these young people, that maybe someone can show them the way out of that life. However, it seems so much different to see it first hand. My cousin is seeing this, and I wonder what her thoughts are now.

We discussed how there are inner city minorities that do make it to bigger and better things, and do not fall back into the "ghetto mentality", the drugs, the violence, and why, if they can do it, can't everyone else? I hear about my cousin and her class and think back to how vulnerable and sponge-like I was at 12 and 13. I was influenced by everything around me, my peers, my parents, my teachers, movies, television. These kids in Oakland are soaking up all that they see in their everyday lives at home, at school, after school. If the only one trying to push them in a healthy direction is my young cousin Amanda...well, that just isn't enough. Which leads me back to the original question in our last class: what do we do?

While I was reading...

During my travel to Fairhope, Alabama for a wedding this past weekend I began reading a cutesy novel, pictured left, to pass the time. It is a mindless work written from different points of view, including that of a wedding planner, demanding bride, laid back groom, and snobby older wedding guest. One can imagine my surprise when I came across a quote in the book from the snobby older wedding guest that pertained to our previous class discussion on Wilson's quote of the poor blacks endorsing the stereotypical image. In the book, the character has just arrived to the wedding reception and is noticing that the servers, bartenders, and greeters are all African American.

"I'm surprised any person of color would acquiesce to fill such a post. If black men don't want to perpetuate stereotypes, they shouldn't accept inferior jobs."

While this is one way to look at the situation, I feel that a job is a job. If this is the easiest way for someone to make a living legitimately, then, by all means, serve away. It is unfortunate that in many industries the minority population is seen as a certain type of worker. It seems, especially in the South, that the minority is viewed as a servant or back of the house employee. The quote from the character rings a bit true, in that it seems as though poor blacks ARE, in fact, endorsing the stereotype by accepting these jobs and not working to become something in a higher position. However, as I wrote above, if this is the only way to earn a living and provide for a family in a legitimate way, then it should be applauded, and not seen as endorsing a stereotype, but doing quite the opposite.