This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Recovery? Student Homelessness Has Doubled Since Before The Recession
Submitted by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,
How’s that recovery going for you? That’s what I thought.
Here’s the latest data point from the ongoing oligarch crime spree shamelessly marketed to the masses as an “economic recovery.”
From Five-Thirty-Eight:
The number of homeless students in the country’s classrooms has more than doubled since before the recession, according to recently released federal data. That’s an alarming trend, but a new report offers some hope: At least part of the increase, the authors say, is not because more students have become homeless, but because states have gotten better at identifying homeless students.
Here’s a visual representation of America’s Banana Republic neo-feualism for those of you so inclined:
Bull market in serfdom. If this is what a recovery looks like, I don’t want to see a recession.
There were about 1.4 million homeless students nationwide in the 2013-14 school year, according to the Department of Education, twice as many as there were in the 2006-07 school year, when roughly 680,000 students were homeless.
The rankings are based on an array of indicators that range from the concrete, like the number of available rental units that are affordable for extremely low-income families, to the less so, like the number of policies that reduce homeless families’ barriers to accessing child care. Matthew Adams, the institute’s principal policy analyst, said that rather than try to measure the effectiveness of policies in each state, which can be hard to quantify, the goal of the report is to identify and compare the efforts being made by each state.
Don’t forget to send thank you notes to America’s #1 criminal at large. Return address optional:
»
- 12506 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Everything is fine, Obama told me so.
What homelessness? I see lot's of UC students renting $5,000/month homes and parking their brand new BMW X3 M3s or Range Rovers on the driveway.
It's a fair bet the students didn't pay for the Rovers or the $5K/month rent. It used to be that you could work your way through college, pay tuition and room and board. Now it's win the parent lotto or live on the street while borrowing untold tends of thousands that you'll never pay back. Pretty consistent with the overall direction of the country.
The USA engages in insane child abuse.
1. Get em in college and in debt for life. Make em buy Apples, books and other crap plus get em credit cards. Charge insane tuition to ensure the profs and endless administrators have golden pensions and that they only have to work 15 hours a week.
Option 2
2. Get em in the military to be fodder for MIC, Deep State and the defense contractors (which is MIC). Also the VA is a racket. Their buget has grown 8x over the past 10 years, while the care is far worse then most veterinarians.
The good news if you get blown up, maimed, lose limbs - they will buy you a dog and give you tickets to a ball game at least once. You will be proud to have served in major clown f**kery in places like Iraq and opium Afghanistan. Just like the poor bastards drafted for LBJ's $$$$ bonanza in Vietnam. JFK gave his life for LBJ's money looting war.
100% pure bullshit
there are gov benefits derived from checking the 'homeless' box when filling out public school paperwork
family member is there watching it happen...screaming wtf
You may not be a fortunate one, or a Senator's son, but you will get free pharmaceuticals because nothings says 'we care' like BIG Pharma, America.
Yet there is how much student debt? Daddy taking out a loan to buy a BMW while who knows what debt is or is not taken out to pay for that shit proves nothing. Sometimes daddy might be able to pay for that BMW outright. Mostly not.
Certain areas are hot. Some cities are hotbeds of jobs but to live there they'll extract a big cost of living on rent and food.
Yet nobody talks about how much debt is required to live in one of those hotbeds if you want to look stylish.
Stylish? That'll cost you.
top down bottom up inside out
If you put the students in debtors prison they will not be homeless anymore.
I am sure Hillery will call for that national policy solution soon enough considering who her donors are.
Prison! That scam. Just job security for the police state industry.
The article is talking about students in public schools. That is generally going to mean K-12 paid for by the taxpayers. College debt is a whole other story.
And who has to pay that debt for public education? Just because there is no loan document the K-12 kids sign does not mean they do not have a huge debt to pay off. That debt can manifest itself in many ways that are not apparent to folks.
Finance and for profit prisons love Hillery. So yes, if she can screw over kids she will.
Buy a house and you'll find out via property tax.
You're tax is their EBT
See max2205's response. After that, whether there are continuing obligations based on educating some kids is going to dependent on what state you are in. The other issue is the quality of the education that kids get. What we're paying for and the results that we get are not lined up. Whether a kid gets a good education depends more on the family that that kid comes from than the school. It also depends more on the neighborhood that the kid lives in. Put the best teachers in the world in our schools, and you'll find out that they have a difficult time teaching critical thinking skills and that they either have some cultural barriers to overcome, or their students are going to do well regardless of what they do.
Our school system is imploding. There are teacher shortages. There is a steam of new bullshit "fixes" that get implemented every year or two without even looking how the last bullshit fix worked out. Everybody has silver bullet and KNOWS how to fix the school system. Nobody is willing to go in and look to see just how it is actually fucked up before implementing what they KNOW will work. Politics, not reality drives this. I figure that if we're going to have a public education, it should at least work. Fix it, or fuck it, but for fuck's sake, quit doing what we're doing.
Thanks for pointing this out. Reading prior comments led me to believe I'd misread the article.
What I don't get is why Bernanke is considered the villain for this problem. How many of these homeless students are illegal immigrants or the offspring of such? How many are children of a welfare queen or single wage-earner? How many are the children of stable two-parent homes? I suspect the numbers would be illuminating. Anti-American progressives are to blame for many of the pathologies afflicting the American population, both legal and illegal. Progressives revel in the arrival of illegals, celebrate the divisive multiculturalism, promote the decay that comes with disfunctional, incomplete families. They advocate policies that weaken, not strengthen, the economy. Bernanke caused plenty of problems; his contribution to student homelessness is miniscule.
The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. What was the middle class in the US should be considered part of the poor in that statement. The poorest among us are going to get the shit in their faces first. We're already seeing this with record EBT numbers. Think bread and circuses. I think that you'll find that if we cannot support the wellfare queens (who shouldn't exist in the first place, but that's another story,) and the wetbacks, soon, we, ourselves will follow.
The ratio of students on a Free or Reduced Price Lunch (the only measure of poverty that our schools use for students) has gone up since 2007. If they had a measure of median income of the families, it would almost certainly show a much more bleak picture. Free or reduced price lunch is a binary (i.e. you're in the program orr you are not) measure. It doesn't tell you how many kids are close to the line, but not quite over it.
Well, I am proud to be a student hobo. I live under a bridge. But I serve my country, Sir. I love Comrade Obozo.
The hero? The really jooed all over that cover.
anyone remember when 'homeless' were called 'bums' or 'hobos?'
just sayin
There is a distinction between "Bum" and "Hobo", at least there was during the depression. A "bum" was a person who had no job, and really had no intention of getting one. A hobo was a homeless man who had given up on finding work where he once lived, and was scrouring the country to find something, somewhere, that he could work at and earn some money. (A hobo would do seasonal work, such as working in fields in planting/harvest season, just to earn some cash to help him keep looking for a "real" job, a bum would have nothing to do with things like "work").
Beware the Bindlestiff, that was a Bum who was adept at stealing from Hobos...
Hopefully, these terms will not go back to being common knowledge...
(One of my Grandfathers was a Hobo at one point in the 1930's, he was never a Bum)...
Had an old fashion kind of a family, the old ones were always around and told tales to the younger ones, often as a warning to them...
That smug face deserves a Mike Tyson tenderizing.
I think Student Homelessness is just another line to get into some girls pants.
WERE ACTUALLY IMPORTING HOMELESS STUDENTS, SO WHAT?
They're getting a first class education ...
"Elect a self absorbed, socialist, community organizer and end up hopelessly in debt and living in your parents basement"
That lesson should stick with them for life.
Or at least longer than the periodic tables.
If I may,I would like to paste a caption below this photograph of a smugly condescending, smiling, Bernanke:
"You utterly pathetic dimwits"
A possible theory on the matter and what the Fed is trying to achieve:
Bernanke is a hero for people around his age group....
You wont have a recovery until you have someone born after 1985 running the show.
The goal of the fed is to help the boomers retire , they are going to slaughter everyone born after the 1980s to achieve this.
Once the excess population is put out to pasture there may be a chance for recovery of the economy and for a return to growth.
Until then consumption will continue to rise faster than production, and inflation will be needed to steal from the working age people in order to pay for the consumption of the retiring boomers.
How can you have growth when there are more mouths to feed than people producing, that forces you into a period of economic contraction, its unavoidable.
The "Me generation" is going to take care of number 1 they will vote to do so even if it means throwing their grandchildren under the bus.
Its up to people aged between 18 and 35 ish to fight to retain their share of the economy, the odds of those age groups succeeding is small because they are heavily outnumbered and there are barriers to entry the "Me Generation" has setup in positions that allow for meaningful change, like the Fed etc... why do they always put some old person in there? Yellen looks like she belongs in a retirement home, and Bernanke is not far off either, look at Greenspan, dude was a relic, until you get some 20-30 year old in positions like Fed Chair you cant have any growth for the future, and whats more there is a real danger that the millennials will hit retirement age before they get a chance to grow the economy, which means we could be in for 60-70 years of recession/depression.... as the only people young enough to work will be outnumbered something like 2 to 1 or 3 to 1, (old to young) which is very dangerous.
Monetary policy needs to force old people to retire, but mass theft has made sure that cant happen, the Bailouts and theft that occurred during the bailouts pretty much evaporated any hopes of recovery as whatever assets could of been used to retire were essentially re-leveraged and confiscated by banks with massive reserve injections.
The bailouts were essentially the final nail in the coffin to seal Americas fate, until they are "un-done" and debt is liquidated you can not have growth.
Just a theory...
As the Social Engineer/architect of the 08 implosion, I can assure you that there will be no recovery whatsoever in your lifetime or that of people born after 1985. The only possible future everyone has is bankruptcy & death plus taxes. In brief, there is no future in the Necropolis unless you are a worm or a bird.
That cover of The Atlantic seems to be Eskimos writing, mostly about other Eskimos. Strange that.