As one of the ten poorest communities according to Forbes is hardly something to be proud of. Granted, we made Forbes, but not in any way we would actually want. Our poverty level is way, way to high and I know of no one who actually thinks this is a good thing. The Albany Herald’s Editorial Board doesn’t think so either, but they seem to get a few things backwards.
The Editorial Board seems to feel that we have to address poverty first if we want growth in Albany, saying “If we want to improve our area’s work force and standard of living, if we want to attract new businesses and residents, the problem of poverty has to be addressed.” Really? Well…how in the hell do you think you can address poverty without growth first?
The problem in Albany is multifold. We have a relatively low literacy rate which doesn’t help and obviously needs to be addressed before any growth can actually happen. But after that, one of the biggest issues is a lack of good paying jobs. To address poverty in Albany, you need jobs that pay more and you need enough of them to drive up the average per capita income above the $21,000 per year reported by Forbes.
For those keeping score at home, the poverty level is $20,000 per year.
To me, the Herald is arguing that poverty has to go away before we can attract new jobs. Isn’t that kind of a “chicken and the egg” argument? I mean, with that logic, Albany’s screwed. We can’t attracted new jobs due to poverty, but we’ll never really eliminate poverty without new jobs. But, is that really the case?
We can argue until we’re blue in the face about what kind of jobs we need, or what all needs to be done to attract them, but most of us seem to agree that new jobs can be attracted…and it seems like the Herald is the only ones who think that poverty is keeping new employers away. Poor communities have pulled themselves out of poverty before, and we can as well. But not with platitudes claiming that “poverty” is keeping us down.
Poverty is a state of being that is only as permenant as one wants it to be. No one who is physically and mentally capable - and I mean no one – stays in poverty if they truly don’t want to be in poverty. I know. I was there myself. I had relatives bringing my family groceries because we couldn’t afford them ourselves. And yet, I got out of that not by being especially gifted or by being especially motivated. I just didn’t want to live like that…so I changed my situation.
But being in “poverty” didn’t keep me down, it was me that kept me there in the first place and it was me that got me out of that life. Pretending otherwise is nothing more than a way to excuse those who would rather make excuses than make things happen in their life. Trust me, it doesn’t require a degree in rocket science to make it happen either…just desire.
Tom….sure many people have the means to pull themselves out of poverty, particularly the “self-starters.” But this societal poverty is a bit more complex and the anecdotal examples either way don’t quite explain the whole mentality or system.
I think one needs to start by removing the subtle notion of “blame” from the analysis (“no one …. stays in poverty if they truly don’t want to be in poverty.” Or similarly, the sometimes correct observation that “poverty is a state of being that is only as permanant as one wants it to be.”
You subscribe to the “just do it” approach to problem solving, and in the end, that is an element of any effective action, but not the only dynamic at play.
If it were simply an individual problem, then it would be quite a coincidence that so many people in objectively challenged markets suffer from it. This is a subtle point, but I think once you see so much of a mentality, one must explore the environmental and other circumstances that may be creating the mentality or condition ….and that process gets us back to societal or community or market conditions or social psychology issues. And in the end, say what you will about the persons, if the jobs or pay are not there or if growing single-parent families with a very unemployable parent proliferate in the market, we are dealing with societal and market problems.
While perhaps valuable in individual therapy settings, these individual mindsets and personalities and inner strengths or weaknesses have little purpose in a discussion about community poverty unless to show how the community conditions play on the weakness of the human condition.
I think we will agree on one point: The safety net that society provides with welfare type payments and entitlements surely keep some people in a static comfort zone. But, society starting making these payments not only out of a sense of responsibility, but also to buy down the risk of abject poverty in the streets, higher crime and even insurrection. With a societal drug culture and escalating urban crime, that “deal” may need to be revisted in some sectors…somehow.
Having said that, I have not really researched community poverty in many years, but I was interested in the dynamics in the 60′s. Much has been written on the subject.
This post is getting long. Perhaps others have ideas on how community poverty comes to be and how it can be overcome in Albany.
I sometimes mix up “post” and “comment.”
Let me add some observations about the local condition. My assumption is that locally available capital, especially private capital, and local well-paying jobs are key elements in improving local market conditions. These tend to beg the question since they are some of the indicia of a more proserous market and if generally available, the market is already where we want it to be. But we do need to start somewhere.
1. This is not a “racial” comment either way: Larger corporations, and even smaller businesses, that are largely white owned and/or managed TEND to leave dominantly African American markets and sub-markets. Comfort, lack of familiarity, cultural differences, whatever, but SEEMS to be a pattern — even playing out in Albany. And gee, they end up in Utah…hmmm.
2. As to Albany, if it were not for the heavy influx of government related incomes and payments, money would be pouring out of this market. The Albany market needs more revenues to come into it from the outside markets and be distributed in the local market and profits kept local. While the Walmarts and other big boxes pose a genuine balancing dilemma, other biz sectors like tech can show promise…case in point, the fella that left Merck in ‘o3 and started a successful science related company here with 50 techie jobs and more coming. His story needs to be studied and replicated. Home grown success is where it is at for now.
3. Every opportunity should be evaluated regarding its ability to being in new revenues and not just to take market share from an exisiting Albany business. New market revenues are KEY.
4. In the recent indoor football “process” it seems no consideration was given to “local.” Local makes sense not only from an operating side, but also from a capital retention basis. Instead, ownership is totally out of town. And it seems that city government has preferred that pattern of support.
5. Same with the selection of architects for the “multi-modal” bus station design work. No local architects involved…instead favorite out-of-towners. This was also Buie’s approach to services and development.
6. As to downtown, the city administration has said it is using the ASU survey of downtown workers as to their wants to design and select development projects…Where are the new market revenues in that?
7. The whole downtown platform needs to be designed to attract new dollars and new better paying jobs and high-value start-ups. Not some of the marginal so-what stuff, but very high-value start-ups.
These are not the only elements in combating poverty, but they are objective ways to increase capital and local prosperity and opportunity and that can be contagious.
btw…we are on that very thread, instead of focusing on the bricks and mortar side of things, I am again pushing on business development. I am not convinced that even providing improved buildings will attract the right kind of business development.
Hopefully, I have learned over the years here. So we will be launching a local biz in the next to weeks that will be a prototype for other regional and national markets…a very replicable home-based business that will bring new money into Albany if successful.
Peter’s dissertation not withstanding I too had trouble with the editorial’s conclusion that “if it weren’t for all this poverty we wouldn’t be so poor”. Am I missing something? Is there a way of escaping poverty that doesn’t include working? We can blame race or racism, ignorance or a failed educational system, the drug culture or failed law enforcement, teen pregnancy or morality issues, pure old sorry or lack of jobs but at the end of the day (as harsh as it sounds) we have a situation where some folks are satisfied to live on what society has been coerced to provide. I used to argue with my mother who grew up in the depression (and could not believe anyone would choose not to work at any job to avoid being on “relief”) that until not working was more painful than working we would continue to have ever increasing numbers of unemployed and folks living in quote poverty. We’re a compassionate society. We demand housing, health care, food, education, transportation, etc. for all. Predictably some are satisfied with the life they are provided and choose not to work to provide for themselves or their children. My fear is that so many generations have known nothing but dependence on government as a way of life that the cycle is unbreakable. Someone convince me there’s hope.
Peter: First, I have always rejected the idea of “community poverty” as being something different than a large concentration of individuals living in poverty. In truth, that’s all it really is. Arguing otherwise is, to me, silly. Communities are made up of individuals and if those individuals live below the poverty line, you have that community existing below the poverty line.
As for my “it’s by choice”, that is only as a long term situation. Bad luck could easily put someone there temporarily, but it takes a decision to stay there indefinitely. I’m sorry, but that’s just reality. I feel bad for the guy there temporarily and personally want to help him out. The guy who is making a lifestyle of living below the poverty line? I feel nothing for.
Other than that, much of your first comment had little to do with the premise of the post, that jobs are needed to fight poverty and arguing that poverty has to go away to get jobs is silly. Everything else is off-topic.
Wilson:
I’d love to convince you that there’s hope of breaking the cycle, but realistically there probably isn’t. A lot would need to happen for that to change, and I just don’t think that Americans as a whole have the stomach for that.
Sorry for the verbosity…I think all the above points are applicable, particularly in any given instance.
I would only say, that, yes, it does come down to the individual and, yes, the societal framework does influence many individuals.
Maybe that is why immigrants often prevail even in decrepit environments…they know what they have to do and have no mindset of expectation or defeatism. They came to work and to succeed and are examples of what you are saying, Tom, and examples of shedding the societal framework.
We are all saying that necessity overcomes the mindset pretty quickly…but one also needs the the right value system inside to overcome in the right way.
It is an endless discussion…but I like the “do it” approach, especially when opportunity exists.
Peter,
My “dissertation” comment wasn’t a complaint. I appreciate the effort you put into your comments. My point was that I believe the answer is simple. That said; giving up isn’t an option so what do we do?
Thanks wilson…
I go back to the urgent need for the right plan. The “do it” approach implies doing something effective and purposeful and putting that in genuine motion. That alone will change some mindsets and attitudes. That’s why I liked Tom’s next post: About the head in the sand but also about Action Leadership.
My current concern with the processes of this administration is that they do not take an “inclusion” approach (including highly effective people) and, frankly, I don’t think they have articulated an effective methodology or implied the best direction as to target market and project types. And rather than creating a think tank and steering group of highly effective and knowledgable people, they likely will miss the higher levels.
I don’t think this administration gets it and that is very very scary for the good people of this community who deserve better.
And by inclusion, I don’t mean the same circle of department heads and not-for-profit heads and government affiliates…I mean new powerful highly effective business people and critical thinkers, fresh and unbiased minds, who can cull facts and ideas in fast and meaningful ways and put together a meaningful plan.
It remains stunning that there still is no plan or movement toward the creation of a powerful plan. While the ASU student survey of downtown worker preferences might have some interesting suggestions, it is at best tertiary and adds little to a goal of attracting new revenues and businesses with career growth opportunities and wealth building opportunities into the Albany market. And it seems that projects will be selected internally by the beaurocrats as is becoming more and more apparent from newspaper quotes, recent processes and from how the downtown manager was left to do things. Some of it is “just fill up those spaces” without regard to the greater needs of this community and the citizens and getting people out of poverty.
At some point, the best and the brightest and most proven local business and professional leaders, new faces, need to be at the table or it is Katie bar the door.